I’m guessing the announcement of their statement was to draw some ratings?

Regarding the gun bias I mentioned here, I am currently involved in an Email exchange with Tearsa Smith, the reporter. As of now, she is seriously looking at it. I’ll let you know how it ends.

She referred to me as Uncle Sam and not SayUncle. Not looking good in the attention to detail department.

Kevin, after finally conceding to the windmills by stating the memos could be fake, writes:

Every single accusation that was originally brought up by the bloggers has been thoroughly discredited.

Horseshit. You may want to reconsider that statement. Or at least start thoroughly discrediting all the claims. Go on, I’ll wait.

Looks like the city council is at it again, having failed once.

A couple of good reads on guns and gun control in South Africa. The first:

Seven South African Police Service provincial commissioners were criticised sharply yesterday by members of Parliament’s safety and security committee for not knowing what was happening on the ground in their areas.

The seven had been called before the committee to report on the progress made in implementing the Firearms Control Act and its regulations.

From next year about 2-million legal firearm owners will have to begin reapplying for their licences. The project has already cost the state more than R63m.

Police have come under fire for the regulations relating to the act, and have been besieged by accusations that they will disarm the private security industry and do irreparable harm to the R2bn- a-year hunting industry.

Committee chairwoman Maggie Sotyu told the assembled commissioners from North West, Limpopo, Eastern Cape, KwaZulu-Natal, Free State, Northern Cape and Mpumalanga that the information they supplied to members of the committee was different to that which the committee had been given on the ground while on oversight visits.

Sounds like they’re taking a cue from Canada and implementing a registration scheme that will fail. The next article says the numbers don’t add up (sound familiar?):

The reality in SA is that 60% of all robberies involve the use of guns. About half of all murders in the country are committed with guns. There are 30 murders for every 100000 of the population each year, making us the secondhighest in the world.

And SA does not have huge numbers of legal guns because the majority of the population historically were denied the right to own guns what we have is racially skewed gun ownership.

The safety and security committee was told that only about 2million South Africans own about 4- million guns. That is less than 5%. Legal guns that is.

MPs were also told that in the past five years 176559 guns were destroyed. But there was another statistic that was pretty scary. In 1998 guns reported lost or stolen totalled 19507. This number has steadily decreased over the past six years, with 12216 guns reported lost or stolen this year so far. The scary part is that in 1998 the number found (either confiscated or recovered) came to 9384. This figure has steadily increased over the same six years, with 20234 guns found between January and August this year.

That means there were about 8000 more weapons found than were lost. Where on earth did they come from? If they were lost or stolen and not reported, why do the South African Police Service figures for prosecutions of those who have been negligent not reflect all these guns?

MPs were also told that this year, for instance, 48994 firearms were destroyed, but only 12000 were reported lost or stolen. Are we honestly being asked to believe more than 34000 legal gun owners failed to report that they had lost their weapons or had them stolen? So where did they come from?

You mean that a gun ban results in criminals obtaining guns illegally? Odd how that works. Additionally, roughly half of US households have guns and the murder rate is about 5.5 per 100,000. Why is that?

With the goal of a shopping center in mind, city officials in Millville drafted an ordinance to take land from existing businesses. Tentatively, the ordinance has been tabled:

Over the last few months, city officials had prepared an ordinance authorizing condemnation proceedings in accordance with local redevelopment and housing laws and eminent domain.

Ah, the shotgun approach: throw many different condemnation plans and hope one sticks.

On abuses:

Those who follow eminent domain abuses were cheered by the Michigan Supreme Court’s ruling this summer that it is illegal for the government to seize private land and transfer it to another private owner for public “benefit.”

But that’s one state. The abuses will not end until the U.S. Supreme Court stops the land-grabbers.

The predicate for these abusive eminent domain cases is that a private entity — the government’s good buddy, naturally — will make better use of the land by providing more jobs or greater tax revenue.

Hypocrisy, thy name is the Lancaster County Commission:

Three months after exercising eminent domain to take land for public use, the Lancaster County Commissioners this morning condemned their colleagues in York County for doing the same thing. Lancaster County Commissioner Chairman Pete Shaub today spoke in opposition to the York County Commissioners’ vote in May to take a 79-acre parcel near Wrightsville.

The land, formally a part of Lauxmont Farms, a 766-acre horse farm, was slated to be an upscale housing development called “Highpoint.”

More taking from one private person to give to another.

This concept that Yeah, sure those memos are fake but that’s not the real story is rather lame. Sure, Bush was a half-assed guardsman. But who cares? These are two separate issues. The second, and I think more important issue, is that CBS ran a story based on weak information. They even knew it was weak beforehand or they wouldn’t have interviewed the document expert before the forgery allegations surfaced. Then, in spite of the evidence, they cling to their weak story.

That’s what’s important.

Check out this pic. Via Jed.

QOTD:

We got up this morning and, lo and behold, the streets were not filled with criminals carrying menacing looking “assault weapons” raping and pillaging the nation despite the expiration of the ineffectual, so-called federal “assault weapons” ban.

Here’s their latest press release:

California Leads Nation in War on Terror – Becomes First State in Nation to Ban 50 Caliber Anti-Armor Sniper Rifles

Law Comes Less Than Three Years After Violence Policy Center First Identified Threat Posed by These Readily Available Tools of Terror

Governor Schwarzenegger Signs Bill That Bans Rifles That Can Destroy Aircraft, Down Helicopters, and Penetrate Armor Plating

Of course, no 50 cal rifle has ever been used in a crime and they can’t destroy aircraft, etc. More coverage on the 50 cal lies can be found here.

Go have a good laugh. After all, the anti-gun side always engages in honest debate, right? Look, over there! Terrorists!

To prove to some people I do have other stuff to talk about, we learn from Jeff that The House is pushing to repeal the unconstitutional DC gun ban:

A majority of the U.S. House of Representatives is supporting legislation that would repeal virtually all of the District’s gun restrictions, targeting one of the nation’s most stringent handgun bans while the presidential candidates are battling over gun limits.

Rep. Mark Edward Souder (R-Ind.) said House Republican leaders have promised him a vote before the Nov. 2 election on his proposed D.C. Personal Protection Act, which would end a ban on handguns in the nation’s capital; remove a prohibition against semiautomatic weapons; lift registration requirements for ammunition and other firearms; and cancel criminal penalties for possessing unregistered firearms and carrying a handgun in one’s home or workplace.

Souder’s bill also would deny the District’s elected officials “authority to enact laws or regulations that discourage or eliminate the private ownership or use of firearms.” The legislation has 228 co-sponsors, more than enough to clear the 435-member House.

The opposition says:

Norton said that repealing the District’s gun laws would worsen violence in the city, where 13 children have been killed by gunfire this year. She also cited the 2002 sniper attacks that killed 10 people in the region.

Given that DC has the highest murder rate in the nation and crime there is terrible, I think it’s safe to assume that the current plan isn’t exactly working.

The WaPo:

The lead expert retained by CBS News to examine disputed memos from President Bush’s former squadron commander in the National Guard said yesterday that he examined only the late officer’s signature and made no attempt to authenticate the documents themselves.

“There’s no way that I, as a document expert, can authenticate them,” Marcel Matley said in a telephone interview from San Francisco. The main reason, he said, is that they are “copies” that are “far removed” from the originals

As of now, they have no experts that they revealed who corroborate the story. A while back, I pondered who faked the memos. I decided it was either some really dumb Democrats or some smart Republicans. Turns out, Rich thinks it may be smart Democrats.

They have a list of firearms that were formerly banned. The list is, of course, wrong because the weapons listed would also have to have more than one of a folding stock, pistol grip, flash hider, threaded barrel, and bayonet lug. As such, those weapons without those features were not banned.

Meanwhile, the ban is already lowering prices in local gun stores:

Gun salesman Clarence Miracle said prices of certain firearms dropped Monday, hours after the expiration of the federal ban on assault weapons.

Miracle, a sales consultant at Craig’s Firearms Supply and Police Distributors, 8671 Chapman Highway, said guns like the Uzi that usually sold for $1,200 now cost $750, and ammunition-feeding devices that once cost $119 are now selling for $19.

“People are coming in and buying tokens. They’re like mementos,” he said. “They just want them now because they couldn’t have them before.”

So, for the second time, the assault weapons ban will put more guns in the hands of citizens. As it was being passed, manufacturers cranked them out and there was a huge supply. Now, it will be higher. I love the irony that the ban will be responsible for putting more guns on the street. Speaking of street, I still haven’t seen any blood on mine.

And a final quote:

Those who paid high prices for pre-banned guns will be disappointed because they’re cheaper

Yup.

Tearsa Smith writes:

Military-style weapons are now legal on the streets of East Tennessee after a 10-year federal ban on certain types of weapons expired at midnight.

No they are not. Military style weapons (AKA machine guns) have been regulated since 1934 and will continue to be regulated. The assault weapons ban does not affect them. She does get one bit right:

Despite that, local law enforcement says it won’t change the way they do their jobs. That’s because despite bans, criminals still get illegal guns.

And then there is this:

For example, take the L.A. bank robbery in 1997. “There are a huge number of those weapons that are out there to begin with that were grand fathered,” said Knox County Sheriff Tim Hutchison. “So, they’re out there for these people that want to break the law to get ahold of anyway. So it really doesn’t make that big of a difference.”

She is now wrong again. The LA robbery involved illegal machine guns, which the assault weapons ban didn’t address, unless they are illegal machine guns that also happen to have more than one of a pistol grip, folding stock, flash suppressor, etc.

Well, what did you expect from the Brady Bunch?

Washington, DC – The ban ends at midnight, but already there are signs of what may follow for America’s police officers. In Dade County Sunday, a police officer was attacked by an AK-47-wielding assailant. She was shot at least twice, and her police cruiser was left in flames. The gunman reportedly fired some two dozen times.

Sarah Brady, chair of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence united with the Million Mom March, called on President Bush to engage on the issue and urge Congress to renew the ban “before police are forced to deal with these extreme weapons of war on a regular basis.

Unbelievable.

I guess I should be super-happy because the AWB expired, but I’m not. Nope, I’m just angry.

I’m angry that the press still have the public convinced that there actually IS such a thing as an “assault weapon.”

I’m angry because ignorant people keep throwing around neologisms like “assault weapon” and prating about how “nobody needs an AK-47 to hunt deer” (as if that had anything to do with the 2nd Amendment), or flatly asserting that “these weapons have no place in our society,” with absolutely NO supporting facts or logic.

I’m angry because the gun banners kept bleating that the streets are going to be “flooded” with firearms when the ban goes away…even though the “ban” didn’t get rid of a single existing gun.

I’m angry that there are enough disgusting, treasonous politicians out there that this kind of obviously un-Constitutional legislation can be passed.

I’m angry that we spent 10 years chafing about what’s essentially a stupid, piddly, little law—I mean, banning guns because they have bayonet lugs fer crissake—if it weren’t so obvious that the real intent of this law were to ratchet us toward DiFi’s “turn ‘em in” utopia.

I’m angry that this stupid, piddly, little law has distracted us from the REAL fight, which is reviving the idea of the armed citizen, which is itself only a milestone on the path restoring a semblance of Constitutional government at the national level.

I may be physically exhausted from lack of sleep, but I’m also mentally tired of reacting to the enemy (that’s what the VPC and their like are…the enemies of free men). I want to take the fight to THEM. I want to get inside THEIR decision cycle and make them react to us. There’s the rub: I’m not sure how to do that.

There is a bright side. We didn’t get here overnight, and so we’re not going to leave overnight. I know that I can’t convince the whole world, or even a significant portion thereof, of the righteousness of our cause. What I can do is raise my son to value this most fundamental right of all mankind, and teach him and his peers that guns aren’t to be feared by the innocent—that a gun in the hand of a free and honest man is a threat only to tyranny and evil.

Oh, and now that the so-called “assault weapons ban” has expired, I can buy him a nice rifle with a folding stock and a bayonet lug.

Mild profanity follows: Read the rest of this entry »

Posting has been light today largely due to emails about guns and what gun should someone buy since the ban expired and yada yada yada.

And another quick check of the streets reveals no blood. Here’s how some gun bloggers (and non gun bloggers) are celebrating its expiration:

AWBanSunset is all over it, like white on rice.

Justin thumps it like Tonya Harding.

Jeff is all over it, like how credibility isn’t on Oliver Willis.

John beats it like it owes him money.

Robert gets technical with it.

The Geek parties like it’s 1999 err 2004.

Publicola gets all jiggy with it.

Meanwhile, somewhere Diane Feinstein is crying like Nancy Kerrigan.

Now, I’ve never been what you might call a prolific blogger at best, but it’s possible you’ve noticed I haven’t posted anything in a while. Well…the good news is: We have a new baby!

Yep, little “Boudreaux” was born last week. He’s been keeping me and Evangeline awful busy and sleepy.

Anyway, back to your regular programming.

Just saw coverage of the assault weapons ban on NBC news. They kept referring to formerly banned guns as military assault weapons, which is a lie. However, every gun they showed on the video snippet was a post ban model. Lame.

In other news, on my way home today, I looked for more blood in the streets. Didn’t see any. However, there were some AK47s and Uzis just walking around asking to be picked up. Damnedest thing, really.

Meanwhile, since Spoons wants to know what to get, SayUncle is going shopping. Going to order one of these (with a flat top upper) this week.

The ban is gone! Yet the AP still spreads misinformation about it. A bet: Every murder covered in the press going forward will be the result of an assault weapon. Check out the Yahoo slideshow.

Just stepped out for a bit, fully expecting to see blood in the streets and hear machine gun fire since the Assault Weapons Ban just expired (a day earlier than I thought, it’s like an early Christmas present). I was disappointed, there wasn’t any.

Don’t listen to these guys (or the AP), the ban hasn’t expired yet. It will tonight at midnight. Don’t put those bayonet lugs on just yet.

Update: Even these guys say so with word from the ATF. I guess it is effective today. I thought it would be through the 13th. Cool.

We’re winning.

The Banned Played On.

With the ban all but defeated, the NRA is looking forward to elections. I figure we’re three days away from them endorsing Bush.

The ban is isn’t a ban:

But the absolutely galling thing about this whole experience is that the “assault-weapons ban” wasn’t a ban at all. I could have saved my money.

That same AK is still available and has been all along and is even cheaper now than when I bought mine.

The ban was the cause and the victim of Democrats’ loss of power. Yup.

And, though Spoons was more eloquent, that liberal media:

An editorial in the Sept. 7 editions about the need to extend the assault weapons ban included a reference to machineguns. The assault weapons ban covers semiautomatic weapons.

You have to scroll all the way to the bottom but it is a correction.

Do they come in digital brown?

I wish Chris the best and hope all is well.

There’s just too much going on to bother posting as it happens. Just go read here and here. CBS got duped. Went in to ass covering mode. Then The Boston Globe outright lies.

As XRLQ says:

In a perfect world…

Professional journalists would routinely debunk the naive musings of amateur bloggers, not the other way around.

And, yet, some still hang on. Now, I’ve never been one to sing the holy praises of the Blogosphere surpassing the mainstream media, but, God damn, did they nail one.

When Tim Lambert agrees with John Lott on the assault weapons ban, that should be a sign the bill is useless.

Lawmen expect little change on the street:

Police chiefs In Kenai, Wasilla, Fairbanks and North Pole expressed no concern about the likely lifting of the nationwide ban on certain military-style firearms, while the Anchorage police chief predicted deadlier weapons will now find their way into more criminals’ hands.

XRLQ has a map of states that have bans. Only seven states? And I thought the ban was popular.

Publicola tells us that Rhodes doesn’t get it.

Did you know you can mail a gun to yourself?

Oliver Willis proves, once again, he has no original thoughts and parrots some one else’s talking points.

While John Cole shows us real assault weapons used by terrorists.

Yglesias on the ban:

Back in my pre-shrill days, and especially when I was surrounded by very bright but typically underinformed leftwing college students I spent a lot of time trying to clear the brush of liberal argumentation, so in that spirit I’m going to risk the wrath of the Almighty Atrios and say that I find Pie’s worry that terrorists will acquire assault weapons by the boatload (literally) and kill us all to be uncommonly silly. The differences between banned assault weapons and many non-banned cognate guns are quite small. We could argue ’till the cows come home as to whether these differences mean anything at all, but they certainly aren’t major enough that the make-or-break decision for al-Qaeda as to whether or not to unleash a hail of bullets on the American people is going to hinge on the renewal or non-renewal of the assault weapons ban.

I have nothing particularly prophetic or poetic to say about the third anniversary other than don’t forget it. If you are a words person, go here. If you are a picture person, go here. And if you want to read the cynical, read my tribute from last year.

Apparently, during the Instalanche I just got, my site was unavailable to people. Jason A. Nunnelley (who also has a blog) kindly emailed me to let me know that I may have some sort of SQL issue. He said it was potentially a max_user_connections system variable problem, which to me is Greek.

He also said:

Sessions timed out, released database access node and your Word Press script was able to do a database connection. There may be other problems as well. But, that’s definitely one of them.

Anyone familiar with Hosting Matters know what I need to do?

Update: Nevermind. Wonder who the other guy was?

And major thanks to Kathy for the assist

Just saw Dan Rather’s defense of the faked memos on the news. He employed a tactic many bloggers use. He found two allegations that may be disproven (superscript and the font) and addressed only those. He got an expert (Marcel Matley) to say the signatures matched. I looked at them and could tell they didn’t. He did not address the many other allegations about the documents.

They had Robert Strong on there who said the documents were compatible with the way business was done at the time. He didn’t say, on camera, that the documents were without a doubt real, even though he was asked.

I TiVoed the bit and watched the superscript segment again. They showed two different types of superscript and did not note they were different, only that superscript was possible. And some guy (Jim Moore) blamed the blogosphere for doing the dirty work of the administration. Blogs on the evening news? Who’d have thunk it?

And Rather hammered the message which is that the real story is Bush’s guard service record. And that blogs were on the attack to discredit the message.

Update: Reader Inge says:

Matley is a Librarian in San Francisco, and also studied Handwriting. He is NOT an expert on documents. I can’t see how Rather can justifiy him as an ‘Expert’.

Here’s some info on him. Here’s a place he works. I can’t say if he would qualify as an expert or not.

Rich has some good stuff on what CBS isn’t doing.

Rather funny.

Senate adjourned for Friday and no renewal of the ban was passed. The Geek and Blake are calling the ban done and just waiting for the clock to tick away. I’ll hold off celebrating until Monday at midnight.

There are several reports of at least eight Governors receiving mail rigged with explosives. Tomorrow is the third anniversary of 9/11. Could this be part of an attack that postal couriers just happened to deliver early? Are more coming? Are bigger things coming?

The calm before the storm?

Regardless, I’d say caution is in order.

The AP:

Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry (news – web sites) said Friday that President Bush failed to protect Americans from criminals and terrorists by letting a ban on assault weapons expire next week.

“In the al-Qaida manual on terror, they were telling people to go out and buy assault weapons, to come to America and buy assault weapons,” Kerry said. “Every law enforcement officer in America doesn’t want us selling assault weapons in the streets of America, but George Bush, he says, ‘Well, I’m for that.’”

As he frequently tells voters on the campaign trail, Kerry said he’s a hunter and fisherman who respects the right of Americans to own guns. He has pledged to protect Second Amendment rights and said the ban can be reinstated without trampling those rights.

“I mean, heavens to Betsy, folks, we’ve had that law on the books for the last 10 years, and there’s not a gun owner in America who can stand up and say, ‘They tried to take my guns away,’” Kerry said.

Well, they tried to keep me from getting guns made after 1994. Of course, it’s obvious that he doesn’t understand the bill. Hell, he doesn’t understand bills he cosponsors. Sportsman, my ass.

. . . eat a ham sandwich (part two). This one is extra icky. First one is here.

John Brown reports that the University of Tennessee 9/11 Memorial has been vandalized.

There’s a good discussion about the reaction from the left and the right portion of the blogosphere to the fake CBS memo over at Pennywit. You should read the whole thing. The sentiment is that if you limit yourself to reading only left wing or right wing blogs, you will walk away from a particular story with a certain impression. Pennywit summarizes a few samples of this. Good read.

However, I have a problem with that. There are only a few left wing bloggers worth reading. For me personally, I don’t just pick a side and stick with it on all issues.

For example: I would be considered left wing or right wing depending on the issue. I am right wing on guns, taxes, the war on terror, and the role of government. I’m left wing on abortion, capital punishment, non-gun related civil liberties, and gay marriage.

Yet, there are only a few left wing political blogs I read. Heck, look at the Moonbattery section of my blogroll. There are only four blogs there. I also read quite a few left leaning Rocky Top Brigade blogs. Here are some of the left leaning political blogs that I read regularly (if I leave anyone out, it’s not on purpose – and if you don’t consider yourself leftist, I do and there’s nothing wrong with that):

The Rant
Brutal Hugs
Tim Lambert
Druq War Rant
SouthKnoxBubba
Damn Foreigner
Lean Left – Props to Leanleft for actually trying to debunk the fake memos with facts and not rhetoric. Kevin was still wrong but he gave it an honest shot.
Chris Wage
Resonance
Barry (though he’s not real political)
Smijer

Why do I read so few? Because the others are often filled with hatred, rhetoric, they are outright moonbats, or partisan hacks. (note: there are some right wing blogs that fit that description but I don’t read them either). For example, here are some prominent liberal blogs that I run across because blogs I do read link to them (it’s not based on TTLB or traffic or Technorati, just my exposure):

Atrios: Full of hatred, repeats tired old lies, and pointless partisan rhetoric. And if I could overlook that, the nausea from the vitriol called a comments section is enough to make me vomit.

DailyKos: More hateful rhetoric including saying Fuck ‘em regarding civilian contractors killed in Iraq.

Oliver Willis: Oliver was a moderate guy a while back. I guess he drank the Kool Aid or something. He has seriously become a parody of himself. You don’t even have to try to make fun of him or find inconsistencies in his posts. Oliver is the antithesis of the other two, who are filled with blinding, partisan hatred. He’s just filed with inconsistent and boring partisan hate wrapped up in mediocre prose.

What I find amazing is that these three sites are popular. I guess they’re popular with people looking for easy targets to refute and the party faithful. Any middle of the road person is not going to be swayed by their commentary. In fact, their verbiage would likely turn many middle of the road folks away.

Heh:

Jack Mehoffer, Springfield, Massachusetts says, “O’Reilly, I see the new Fox definition of fair and balanced means interviewing DNC chief Terry McAuliffe at both conventions.”

Bushmaster settled the DC sniper suit out of court. The Brady Campaign got on the media horn declaring it a victory. Bushmaster said no, they’re wrong. It was just cheaper for us to pay them off:

The Brady Group sent a second tier lawyer to the settlement conference with nine demands on Bushmaster regarding business practices and Bushmaster denied them all. We then gave the Brady Group our statement that we support the BATF licensing requirements to be a Federal Firearms Licensed (FFL) holder and our support for the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) safety programs, and they accepted our statement. We did not agree and would not agree to change the way we do business or make any additional demands of our customers. We were emphatic that Bushmaster did not commit any wrong doings.

The attorney for our insurance company was at the settlement conference and informed us that about half of our policy limits had been spent on trial lawyers. It was the insurance company’s position that all of the limit would be spent on this case, and therefore turned the funds over to Bushmaster to use as we saw fit removing the insurance company from the case. Our choice was to continue spending it on trial lawyers or turn it over directly to the victims’ families with no funds going to the Brady Group for their legal fees.

We felt the compassionate thing to do was give it to the victims’ families, not because we had to but because we wanted to. The Washington DC Brady Group should learn what compassion is really all about!

WATE:

Cracker Barrel says it’s settled all lawsuits claiming racial discrimination.

Company president and CEO Donald Turner says the Lebanon-based restaurant company is “very pleased” with the settlement.

The Beeb calls them heavy assault weapons, as though the ban applies to anti-air guns or something.

John Lott calls the ban useless in the LA Times. Yes, the LA Times.

Somebody call the Waahmbulance.

MTV on the ban:

On the list of banned guns are civilian versions (i.e. slightly less powerful models) of the AK-47 assault rifle and Uzi. Fully automatic weapons are not covered and will remain illegal no matter what happens.

Slightly less powerful? In terms of power, they are the same. In terms of rate of fire, there is a huge difference. At least MTV says that machine guns aren’t covered by the ban, which is more than we can say for a lot of press coverage of the ban.

Chief Deputy of Rockford, Illinois:

“What are they for…you just pull the trigger…I don’t agree with it…I think (the ban) should be extended,” says Puckett.

Puckett says that during the 10-year ban he hasn’t noticed a great change in crime in Loves Park. But he says assault weapons have shown up in Loves Park from time to time.

No change in crime yet you support the ban?

Columbine parents on the ban:

I guess the assault (weapons) ban did nothing to protect my son,” said Brian Rohrbaugh, father of slain student Daniel Rohrbaugh. “As it was worded, I’m not sure it had any value other than a political agenda.

WKRN in Nashville needs to take a Civics Class:

Some semi-automatic guns, like those with collapsible stocks and other military-type features, have been banned since 1994, when President Clinton made it illegal to manufacture or import them.

The president makes laws? Nashville Police chief says:

“The type of weapons that were banned are made for one thing – killing a lot of things at one time,” said Metro police chief Ronal Serpas.

Chief Serpas said that assault weapons have no purpose in the hands of civilians, and he fears making them legal, will lead to more violence…and more danger for police.

Oh, that liberal media:

During that segment, video footage from the North Hollywood bank robbery shootout in March 1997 showed the robbers firing full-automatic weapons, suggesting that this type of firearm will be legal when the ban expires at midnight Sept. 13. These guns had been illegally modified, yet ABC News left the impression that such rifles will be available to the general public.

Find out the truth about assault rifles yourself.

Gunners and antis slug it out on PBS.

Paul Vitello is still an idiot (has been for a while):

For obvious reasons, federal law bans the sale of semi-automatic rifles with flash-suppressors. Snipers can put flash suppressors on their rifles to keep from being seen as they squeeze off rounds from their hideaways.

A flash suppressor hides the flash from the shooter so he can maintain sight picture. There’s a lot more hysteria in the horrendous piece.

The New York Times is absolutely bat shit hysterical.

Really stupid Democrats? Smart Republicans? Nader? Or CBS? Lee Harvey Oswald?

When the AP picks up the fake memo story (though cautiously), something is up. What I would give to be a fly on the wall at CBS tomorrow.

The mountain of evidence keeps growing. Check Powerline, which has several more posts, for details.

Update: The story will apparently be on ABC tonight.

Bubba reports that the Metropulse has closed the Metroblab, a Knoxville area discussion forum. It was closed, apparently, at the discretion of the publisher because of some heated discussion.

The blab was where I first ran into SouthKnoxBubba, who was the inspiration for starting my own blog. It was the beginning of this blog, as it were. It will be missed.

Update: Bubba set up BubbaBlab as a replacement for any wayward blabbers looking to argue with someone.

Heh!

Double Heh!

. . . eat a ham sandwich.

The buzz in the right half of the blogosphere is that the new National Guard documents regarding President Bush that were reported on 60 Minutes may be fakes. Powerline is on it. See also here and here for some comparisons to home cooked versions.

Update: Powerline seems to be down, I’m guessing due to traffic. They got Drudgelanched.

Update 2: Bill asked an expert who says they’re probably fake. And Kevin says they’re not fake because the White House hasn’t disputed their authenticity.

I am reserving judgment on this one until the White House responds.

Update 3: The reason I was suspicious was not due to superscript or proportional spacing (IBM had that in 1941). However, the fact MS Word’s default settings generate identical documents is odd.

XRLQ told me I should blog about why he should leave California. More to the point, he wanted to convince his wife of their need to leave California. I would recommend coming to Tennessee and here’s Exhibit A:

New Yorkers pay the highest state and local taxes in the nation, shelling out nearly $131 for every $1,000 of income in 2002, according to a new study.

Tennessee taxed its citizens the least — they paid just under $84 for every $1,000 of income.

Cali ranks 17 and pays $106 per $1,000 in income.

Sounds like justice to me:

A man who tried to shoot seven puppies was shot himself when one of the dogs put its paw on the revolver’s trigger.

Jerry Allen Bradford, 37, was charged with felony animal cruelty, the Escambia County Sheriff’s Office said Wednesday. He was being treated at a hospital for a gunshot wound to his wrist.

Bradford said he decided to shoot the 3-month-old shepherd-mix dogs in the head because he couldn’t find them a home, according to the sheriff’s office.

On Monday, Bradford was holding two puppies — one in his arms and another in his left hand — when the dog in his hand wiggled and put its paw on the trigger of the .38-caliber revolver. The gun then discharged, the sheriff’s report said.

Deputies found three of the puppies in a shallow grave outside Bradford’s home, said sheriff’s Sgt. Ted Roy.

If you can’t care for pups, have your dog fixed.

Jay has a game for you. And congrats to Jay for taking up the shooting sports. Got that Glock yet?

Volokh catches some anti-gun bias:

Pro-control forces are “activists,” “advocates,” or “groups.” The anti-control forces are the “gun lobby.”

And:

The story goes on with twelve paragraphs, of which each one paraphrases, quotes, or describes the stance of a pro-gun-control advocate. Only three of them even mention the views of pro-gun-rights advocates.

Bruce notes some more gun hysteria:

The ban, however, will expire. Bush will get his endorsement. And people are going to die.

I guess on the 14th when there is no blood in the street and no increase in the murder rate, you’ll be having the crow with a nice Chianti? Or maybe feet?

Knoxvillians get to decide exactly which way they’ll get screwed:

It’s now a property tax increase vs. the wheel tax.

Knox County commissioners voted Wednesday night to enact an 18-cent property tax boost if a referendum to repeal the wheel tax succeeds.

In an 11-6 vote, the 6 percent property tax increase would only go into effect if voters repeal the current $30 wheel tax.

I don’t live in Knoxville, but I’d say ax the wheel tax. The reason is that your property taxes will go up some day anyway. That is the same reason I oppose the state income tax. I know that if they pass it, the sales tax will go up eventually anyway. Why give the bastards two avenues to raise the rates?

Daley urges Bush to push for the ban:

Mayor Daley urged President Bush on Wednesday to put political muscle behind his campaign rhetoric and pressure Congress to extend the federal ban on “murderous” assault weapons before it expires next week.

With gun manufacturers already marketing military-style firearms and poised to sell them at midnight Monday, Daley wrote a letter to Bush and appealed to Chicagoans to do the same with members of Congress who would rather “run and hide” than confront a powerful gun lobby that fills their campaign coffers.

“Legislative leaders refuse to bring the issue to a vote. That way, assault weapons can become legal again, the gun lobby will be happy and nobody in Congress will ever get blamed. . . . The one person who can force this matter to a vote is President Bush,” Daley told a news conference at police headquarters.

They were never illegal.

NPR says it’s about to expire.

Leaders in congress to allow the ban to expire:

Congress will not vote on an assault weapons ban due to expire Monday, Republican leaders said yesterday, rejecting a last-ditch effort by supporters to renew it.

“I think the will of the American people is consistent with letting it expire, so it will expire,” Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) told reporters.

The 10-year ban, signed by President Clinton in 1994, outlawed 19 types of military-style assault weapons. A clause directed that the ban expire unless Congress specifically reauthorized it.

Some Democrats and several police leaders said President Bush should try to persuade Congress to renew the ban. Bush has said he would sign such a bill if Congress passed it.

“If the president asked me, it’d still be no … because we don’t have the votes to pass an assault weapons ban and it will expire Monday and that’s that,” House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) told reporters later.

Thanks to Frist and DeLay.

Jointogether fires up the rhetoric about guns in the streets because, you know, we don’t have any there now:

According to the report, once the ban expires, Beretta plans to offer customers two free 15-round magazines with the purchase of two of its weapons.

In addition, foreign gun manufacturers, including Israel Military Industries Ltd., which makes Uzi-brand submachine guns, are expected to introduce semiautomatic models into the U.S. market.

If the ban is lifted, Illinois-based ArmaLite Inc. will launch a program that would allow buyers to convert their guns to use flash suppressors, bayonets, and other features that are now illegal, the report predicted.

I can’t wait to get some regular capacity magazines for my Sig for less than $100. And the Uzi has been banned from import since 1989.

DiFi attempts to call out the president on the issue stating he’s kowtowing to the NRA. Meanwhile LaPierre says that proponents of the ban mis-characterize the ban as affecting machine guns:

The NRA and other gun-rights groups criticize the assault weapons ban as cosmetic, noting that guns similar to the banned weapons are legal, and fully automatic weapons are banned under a separate law.

“The House is much more educated, members are, about what’s in that ban than they were last time,” LaPierre said. “This thing was marketed by the people who were in favor of it as dealing with machines guns, dealing with guns that were supposedly convertible to machine guns, guns that spray bullets … all of which was a mischaracterization of the firearms on that list and all of which was not true.”

Hysteria from Newsday accuses Bush of flip-flopping (are you sick of political buzzwords yet?). And the reference to machine gun rat-tat-tat-tat rather proves LaPierre’s point.

Walking the Walls reports that nothing happened in moving the ban forward.

Publicola addresses some more media hysteria. So does Jeff.

The Houston Chronicle says the ban is done for. Good.

DeLay:

“If the president asked me, it’d still be no … because we don’t have the votes to pass an assault weapons ban and it will expire Monday and that’s that,” House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, told reporters later.

And the hysterical crap of the day. Note the image with the caption:

If the federal ban on assault weapons is allowed to expire next week, expect gun manufacturers to roll out high-powered firearms such as this AR-15 rifle, observers say.

That rifle lacks a bayonet lug, folding stock and bayonet lug. That weapon is legal to manufacture and sell under the current ban.

The Supreme Court will decide whether hear the case of the city of New London taking property from 15 homeowners and giving it to private developers. I don’t have much faith in the Supreme Court given their recent shortcomings in campaign finance reform and Silviera v. Lockyer.

An Illinois town is suing to take land for a new school.

Bruce Bartlett:

A new report from the Congressional Budget Office explains that the deficit is a virtually meaningless measure of the government’s indebtedness. The main reason for this is that the federal government uses cash accounting rather than accrual accounting. What this means is that the government can acquire massive debts far into the future with virtual impunity. The government can also, in effect, cosign for loans and provide insurance that could potentially cost taxpayers hundreds of billion of dollars without it ever showing up in the budget until a check has to be written.

Yeah, another smart guy said almost the same thing a while back.

As the hysteria for the assault weapons ban picks up, check this out:

Feinstein said the White House has failed to aggressively endorse the ban, in hopes of winning support from the powerful National Rifle Association (NRA) ahead of November’s presidential election.

The membership of the NRA, which strenuously opposes renewing the law, is largely white, conservative, rural and male — a key component of US President George W. Bush’s base.

Equally vocal in its support of reinstating the anti-assault weapons law, the non-profit Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence has called on the public to flood the White House with e-mails and telephone calls urging its renewal.

Adjective used to describe the NRA: powerful.

Adjective used to describe the Brady Campaign: non-profit.

The NRA, steering clear from endorsing Bush (mark my words, when the assault weapons ban expires, they will), is going to run ads on Kerry’s record on guns. I don’t care about that. What I found most interesting from the article is this quote:

Addressing another major issue, LaPierre said the NRA is so confident Congress and President Bush will allow a federal assault-weapons ban to expire on Monday that it doesn’t plan to run any ads pushing for an end to the 10-year-old ban.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., said Wednesday that the Senate wouldn’t revisit the assault weapons-ban issue this year. Republicans tabled the issue earlier this year at the NRA’s request.

The NRA is confident the ban will expire. And, since no gun control has passed in this country without their approval since 1934, I’d say the fix is in.

Oprah Winfrey and Lifetime (Television that sucks) make a lot of money scaring the shit out of affluent white women. Yours truly was the victim of Oprah induced paranoia last night. A couple of days ago, Oprah had a show on cleanliness and how often one should clean. Me and the Mrs. (mostly the Mrs.) clean fairly regularly so I had no fears about it. Then, Oprah did the segment on dust mites in pillows and bed linens. I remember, as a kid, watching the TV show That’s Incredible who had a similar segment. It was creepy watching the little critters frolic in the threads of the fabric but, the fact is, they are harmless and are everywhere.

In typical Oprah fashion, this scared the Hell out of Mrs. Uncle. Yours truly had a particular goose feather pillow. I’ve had it since I was a kid. Granted, it’s probably too long to have the pillow but I loved it. It was worn in, comfy, and I always slept with it. The Mrs. even loved the pillow. In fact, when I’d come to bed after the Mrs., she often was lying on the pillow (which I would promptly take from her and this caused a few marital spats – don’t mess with my pillow).

The Mrs., knowing that I would not allow her to throw the pillow away or I would very likely divorce her if she did throw it away when I wasn’t looking, decide to wash the pillow. Yes, you can wash pillows so no worries. The Mrs. washes the pillow. She goes to take the pillow from the washer and I hear the words OH MY GOD. These were followed with some mumbling but I thought I heard the words kill me. At the time, I was unaware she was washing my favorite pillow. She says to me You’re going to kill me and explains that she was just trying to wash my pillow along with some other things.

I look in the washer and it looks like someone put a goose through a wood chipper (except without the blood that would be involved if you actually put a goose in a wood chipper). There were feathers everywhere. Apparently, you can wash pillows but you can’t wash fabric that is decades old. The liner of the pillow tore and the feathers spun around in the rinse cycle. I remain calm. I have a good laugh with the Mrs. about it and take a picture of the remains of my pillow (I may post it later) and tell her it’s OK and that I’m not going to kill her.

I curse Oprah’s name. My wife even mumbles something about Oprah. If I could have gotten my hands on Oprah, I’d have choked the bitch.

I reel from the shock of the fact my pillow cannot be salvaged only to realize that I have a washer full of feathers and clothes. SayUncle, who is somewhat familiar with the operation of a dryer, gets the idea that we’ll put the clothes in the dryer and the dryer vent will catch the feathers. Great idea. However, the vent filled up in about 2 seconds and burning feathers smell like burning hair. Bah.

Plan B consists of using my Shop Vac to get the feathers. This plan works but takes a while. After, I start the dryer again. It now wreaks of burning feathers and an overheating motor. If Oprah had cost me a new dryer, I’d be on my way to LA right now. I took the vent out of the dryer, disconnected the vent hose and vacuumed them out. I managed to save the dryer. The Mrs. vacuumed the laundry room. This took two and a half hours.

Oprah, on behalf of men who have had to suffer from Oprah induced paranoia, you can kiss my ass.

Update: Oprah is apparently in Chicago. I thought all TeeVee came from LA LA land. Shows how much I know about her. She can still kiss my ass.

Got an interesting search for weapons of choice for criminals just now. The query came from the United States Senate. Someone’s doing their homework on the ban.

Wonder if they’ll quote me?

Triggerfinger reports DiFi is up and has 19 minutes. She is pushing the assault weapons ban.

Update: DiFi repeats the same old lies. Calls on Bush to support it. Kennedy is up stating that terrorists use assault weapons.

Update: Kennedy calls on Bush too. Now he’s talking about 1,000 dead in Iraq.

First, the AP takes a quote out of context from Dick Cheney, then let Edwards respond by calling Cheney un-American. What do you have? Politics.

Oh, that liberal media.

Note: the Seattle Times piece above said the Kerry campaign called Cheney un-American. However, on the news this morning it was clearly Edwards stating that.

Update: South(of)KnoxBubba’s comment prompted me to re-read the quotes. I think SKB may be right but without listening to the audio, I can’t be sure. I guess stuff is lost in transcribing. Also, the Cheney people have rescinded the statement. Unlike Drudge, I’ll leave my error here.

This does not excuse calling the Veep un-American. That term and questions about patriotism are really dirty politics, no matter which side uses them.

Matt thinks the shotgun given as a gift to Kerry is a no-no.

This proves Kerry doesn’t read or understand the bills he sponsors:

“Let’s do some straight shooting on the gun issue. John Kerry’s opponents are worried because he’s the first Democratic candidate to support Second Amendment gun rights and to be an avid hunter.

“The facts are clear. John Kerry opposes banning this gun and always will. John Kerry was proud to receive this union-made gun at the United Mine Workers Labor Day picnic in Racine, West Virginia.

Then why sponsor a bill that may have banned it?

First, my opinion. The ban will sunset. Anti-gunners will vote for Kerry, period. Bush can only lose votes from gun owners and NRA members by pushing for the ban. He knows it and his advisers know it. Additionally, if the ban sunsets, I predict an NRA endorsement for Bush. However, after November, a push for it wouldn’t surprise me. Even the bill’s sponsors say it has no chance without Bush:

The fight to renew a favored ban on assault weapons effectively died Tuesday after the lead Senate sponsor of a bill to continue restrictions on the sale and manufacture of some semi-automatic weapons conceded defeat.

“Absent the president twisting arms, it’s nil,” said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., of the chances to get a bill passed before midnight Monday, when the law expires.

However, they continue their efforts.

Gun makers gear up for demand:

Gun manufacturers are gearing up for next week’s scheduled expiration of a 10-year-old federal ban on assault weapons, and are taking orders for semiautomatic rifles and high-capacity ammunition magazines that may soon become legal again, according to a report released yesterday.

The report by the Consumer Federation of America, which favors greater regulation of the gun industry, was based on interviews with gun-industry officials and reviews of advertisements and other sales materials.

Excellent!

Here’s one that says the assault weapons ban works but the holes need to be plugged (ed – if it works, there shouldn’t be a need to plug holes):

By any measure, the 1994 federal ban on assault weapons errs on the side of permissiveness. A gun can’t have both a grenade launcher and a bayonet mount, but it can have one of those attachments. It can’t be sold with an ammo clip holding more than 10 rounds unless the clip is one of hundreds of thousands made before the law took effect. It can’t be one of 19 specified weapons — unless it, too, was around before 1994.

Now, as the law marks its 10th anniversary, President Bush and Congress have a novel idea for dealing with these gaping loopholes: Let the law expire entirely. That will happen Monday if they don’t reverse current plans.

In spite of a drop in gun deaths since the ban was enacted and despite new fears of terrorism, Bush and Republican leaders in Congress seem more concerned about courting favor with the powerful gun lobby than allowing weapons of mass mayhem back on the nation’s streets.

The drop in gun deaths can not be credited to the ban, ask the CDC and the NIJ, who both stated the ban has been shown to have no effect on gun crime.

The pending sunset of the ban has caused politicos in Michigan to consider a local ban.

The Suntimes is full of hysteria.

The boys continue live blogging coverage of the Senate floor. Keep checking here for updates.

Here’s a plug for a book that highlights abuses of Eminent Domain, entitled Abuse of Power: How the government misuses eminent domain, by Steven Greenhut:

Few phrases in the American lexicon seem as ominous, regal and potentially frightening as “eminent domain.” And that’s as it should be. The government’s power to condemn and forcibly take a person’s private property, even if compensation is paid, isn’t something to be taken lightly or used in a frivolous or indiscriminate way. The right to one’s property is a bedrock American principle. It should be waived only under narrow and rare circumstances – and when the power of eminent domain is invoked, it should be for clearly recognizable public benefit.

Private property rights are today under siege in many ways. But perhaps no more so than in the misuse of eminent domain by government officials dealing favors to private companies and interests. Evidence of these abuses has been anecdotal and fragmented until now. Thanks to the publication of Steven Greenhut’s “Abuse of Power: How the government misuses eminent domain,” we now have the most comprehensive, up-to-date look yet at this American scandal. Published by Seven Locks Press, it’s available through amazon.com.

Greenhut is a senior editorial writer and columnist at a sister paper, The Orange County (Calif.) Register. He casts a wide net in trying to get a handle on a national problem. “Eminent domain creates an avenue for corruption,” Greenhut points out, “as government officials get to play God with other people’s neighborhoods and businesses, and can therefore punish enemies and reward friends.”

I wonder if he means abuses like this:

Ms. Kelo and the Derys are among seven property owners who refused to budge after city officials approved an economic development plan to upgrade their 90-acre waterfront neighborhood, known as Fort Trumbull, by creating prime office space, a hotel, 80 units of housing and a Coast Guard museum.

Because these people would not sell their property, the New London Development Corporation took title to it through eminent domain, a decision upheld in March on a 4-to-3 vote by the Connecticut Supreme Court. The Fifth Amendment allows governments to take private property through eminent domain in exchange for “just compensation,” but only when it is for “public use.”

Or this one:

The city of Columbiana is attempting to have the Summer Classics property rezoned from light industrial to a retail shopping district. And the city is threatening the use of eminent domain to get the property at what it considers a fair price.

Columbiana Mayor Allan Lowe said the city is in need of public parking for its retail district. He also said the city does not want a manufacturing operation in the heart of downtown.

Publicola has the lowdown on pistol grips.

Jointogether, an anti gun group, issued a press release stating:

A study commissioned by the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) says that the federal assault-weapons ban can’t be credited for a recent decline in gun-related violence, the Washington Times reported Sept. 1.

“We cannot clearly credit the ban with any of the nation’s recent drop in gun violence. And, indeed, there has been no discernible reduction in the lethality and injuriousness of gun violence,” said the report written by Christopher Koper, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania. “It is thus premature to make definitive assessments of the ban’s impact on gun violence. Should it be renewed, the ban’s effects on gun violence are likely to be small at best and perhaps too small for reliable measurement.”

The report found that assault weapons were “rarely used in gun crimes even before the ban.” Prior to the 1994 ban, the report determined that assault weapons were used in 2 percent of gun crimes reported nationwide. Assault weapons were unpopular with criminals because they are expensive, difficult to conceal, and prohibited from importation, the report noted.

It sounds to me as though they are attempting a last minute grab for credibility before pushing for a more strict gun ban. I covered the NIJ study here.

Countertop has lots of stuff, including pending publicity stunts.

Jeff Blogworthy emails a link to this Drudge story which states:

KERRY COSPONSORED BILL BANNING GUN HE WAVES

Dem presidential hopeful John Kerry was seen this weekend waving a gun which would have been banned if legislation he co-sponsored became law!

Kerry co-sponsored S. 1431 last year (“The Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2003) which would have banned a “semiautomatic shotgun that has a pistol grip.”

Kerry was presented with the gun during a Labor Day stop in Racine, West Virginia.

It’s a pity that the gun he’s holding in the photos doesn’t actually have a pistol grip. Therefore, Drudge’s claim is false, assuming this isn’t a file photo. However, putting a pistol grip on it (which would not impact the shotgun’s lethality in any way) would have made it illegal under the bill Kerry proposed, which was an attempt to extend the assault weapons ban. Another attempt at banning aesthetic features.

Another Drudge misfire.

Update: However, Drudge gets some stuff right (he has updated the story):

But Kerry’s gun bill would also banned any “gift” transaction!

It is not clear if Kerry submitted to a waiting period and completed the required paperwork (a 4479 form) or Brady background check before he claimed the gun.

It appears that under the proposed law the transfer would have to go through a dealer. The bill reads:

`(5) It shall be unlawful for any person to transfer a semiautomatic assault weapon to which paragraph (1) does not apply, except through–

`(A) a licensed dealer, and for purposes of subsection (t) in the case of such a transfer, the weapon shall be considered to be transferred from the business inventory of the licensed dealer and the dealer shall be considered to be the transferor; or

`(B) a State or local law enforcement agency if the transfer is made in accordance with the procedures provided for in subsection (t) of this section and section 923(g).

He would, under the proposed law, have to go to a licensed dealer to complete the transfer. The fact it is a gift is irrelevant. Drudge continues:

Also, since the Gun Control Act of 1968 was passed, it has been illegal for an unlicensed individual (a non-dealer, non-collector, non-manufacturer, etc.) to obtain a firearm in a state in which you are not a legal resident.

It seems Kerry needs to go to Federal Firearms Licensed dealer to lawfully transfer the firearm. Current ATF guidelines state:

A person not licensed under the GCA and not prohibited from acquiring firearms may purchase a firearm from an out-of-state source and obtain the firearm if an arrangement is made with a licensed dealer in the purchaser’s state of residence for the purchaser to obtain the firearm from the dealer.

I don’t know if any leeway is granted because it is a gift.

Update 2: XRLQ informs us that:

It’s not clear that he needs to (go through a dealer, do background check, etc.) , either. Unless the person who gave him the gun was a licensed dealer, the transfer probably fell within the private party transfer exception to the Brady Act. What? You’ve never heard of the private party transfer exception? It’s been living in the papers for a long time now, under an assumed name: “gun show loophole.”

and

As originally passed, the Gun Control Act of 1968 did indeed generally prohibit citizens from obtaining firearms outside their state of domicile. In its present form, however, the flat prohibition applies only to handguns, with 18 U.S.C. 922(b)(3) expressly allowing face-to-face transfers of long guns outside the recipient’s state of domicile, provided that “the sale, delivery, and receipt fully comply with the legal conditions of sale in both such States.”

Update3: Gunner says a pistol grip is whatever the government decides is a pistol grip. I hope not.

HL agrees with me.

Update4: The definition of pistol grip under current law reads protrudes conspicuously below the action of the gun. Kerry’s gun has a grip that is behind the action of the gun.

The bill Kerry sponsored defines pistol grips as a grip, a thumb-hole stock, or any other characteristic that can function as a grip. So, any grip? Maybe Drudge inadvertently isn’t full of it. Regardless, it was a bad bill.

And thanks to Glenn for the link. He has more. And if you’re just here for my gun stuff, go here.

Last Update: Via John, Kopel says that under the law Kerry pushed for, it would be a pistol grip, as I said in Update 4.

This is a testament to how arbitrary (and stupid) gun laws are. It took the pro-gun portion of the blogosphere (some knowledgeable folks) a bit of time to figure out whether the gun had a pistol grip or not. The answer is that in reality it doesn’t. But per some arbitrary law that was proposed, it would have. For another illustration of stupid gun tricks, go here.

John Kerry is blasting Bush for the huge government deficit. Where did those fiscally responsible conservatives go?

However, it doesn’t help Kerry that he voted for the budget himself (or, rather, he didn’t oppose it as it was passed by unanimous consent – and that’s assuming that he actually showed up that day).

In a follow up to this post on the candy cigars representing Bush and Kerry, I stopped at the same convenience store today. The Bush box was not there (I assume it was sold out). There was a Kerry box there that had about half the cigars left. The Kerry box had not been vandalized, which I assume means the store has now gone through multiple boxes.

Since there was no Bush box, I wonder how long before some local gets upset with the store for apparently endorsing Kerry.

Bastards.

There is one week to go before the sunset of the assault weapons ban. Publicola, The Geek, and Matt have set up a new blog to monitor the death of the ban called Walking The Walls. This blog will have some live blogging of the senate floor.

For info on how you can fight the ban, see the Geek’s post on calling congressmen and the president. Get contact info for your reps here.

Here’s the NRA’s resource page for fighting the Assault Weapons Ban.

Additionally, AWBSunset is a good source of info on the ban. The anti-gunners will not let this die without a fight. The increased hysteria in the media is a good sign of that.

Like this piece by Swanee Hunt, which is so full of lies, picking one doesn’t do it justice:

I don’t know about you, but keeping AK-47s, Uzis and TEC-9s off our streets seems like a good idea to me.

The same old rhetoric about AKs and Uzis. This is false because both are still available in semi-automatic configuration and the full-auto versions have been regulated since 1934. Additionally, a 1989 executive order bans the import of Uzis and AKs.

More powerful than the guns most cops carry, they fire hundreds of rounds in just a couple minutes and oftentimes pierce body armor.

The ban does not affect machine guns and any rifle round will penetrate body armor. Assault weapons fire medium powered ammunition. A hunting rifle is more powerful.

According to data maintained by the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, assault weapons are 20 times more likely to be used in a crime than conventional firearms.

That is a blatant lie. The weapons are used in less than 1% of crimes. Both the CDC and DOJ have said the ban has no impact on crime.

A report from the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, using data from the ATF, shows that the number of assault weapons traced to crime has dropped 66 percent since the law passed.

The ATF has also said that gun trace data (which is not always used to trace to crime) is a useless measure for determining the impact on crime.

The infamous TEC-9, a gun favored by murderers and criminals for its light weight and ability to mask fingerprints . . .

Mask fingerprints? That’s a new one to me. Most guns, because of their checkered grips, don’t hold fingerprints very well but no gun I know of masks them.

When the law was passed, 16 percent of gun murders of police officers were with assault weapons. Two years later, it had dropped to zero

Another outright fabrication. The VPC says the number is 41 since 1998, which is also a fabrication.

This is what we’re up against. An opinion piece so full of distortions and outright lies that, if you believed this woman’s supposed facts, you would support the ban. However, she is completely full of shit..

Update: I have found Swanee Hunt’s email address swanee_hunt@harvard.edu. Other contact info is here.

Per The Hill, some police chiefs are trying to meet the president to get him to push for the assault weapons ban:

A week before the controversial assault-weapons ban is set to expire, law-enforcement officials are requesting a meeting with President Bush in hopes that he can exert pressure on Congress to renew the ban. But the White House has been mum on whether such a meeting is going to take place.

In a recent letter to Bush, the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) and other law-enforcement groups asked to meet with the president “to share our perspective on the importance of preserving the ban.” The IACP is unaware of a White House response to the request, and the administration did not return calls seeking comment.

No comment from the White House. This gives me hope that the president will not push for the ban. Good. Additionally:

Karl Rove, Bush’s top political adviser, late last week declined to answer directly a question from The Hill on whether the president would call to renew the ban in the next couple of weeks. Gun-control activists have pointed out repeatedly this year that Bush backed the reauthorization of the ban in 2000 but has not called on Congress to act.

The talking points of the police politicians consists of:

There is a “critical need” to extend the ban, the law-enforcement groups said in the letter. “If the law is not renewed, the firearms of choice for terrorists, drug dealers and gang members will be back on our streets. … With homeland security becoming an increasingly vital part of the daily law enforcement mission, we need to know that these assault weapons and their capacity magazines will not be back in circulation.”

Got that? Terror, drugs and the kitchen sink. I guess by critical, they mean the less than 1% of times these guns are used in crime. Or by critical they mean how the CDC and DOJ have found the ban to have no effect on crime. Meanwhile, a letter to the editor in The Hill points out how the support for the ban is completely misrepresented in the media:

Re your July 29 article discussing the impact of anti-gun stances by political candidates (“Guns divide campaign”): I was amazed that the article stated that polls showed an absurdly high percentage of Americans want the assault-weapons ban extended. Granted, in a carefully framed poll question, uninformed respondents might give answers that could inflate this percentage this way.

Certain anti-gun organizations have engaged in public-relation campaigns to confuse persons not close to the issue by redefining (“recasting”) the term “assault weapon” to include firearms that are not assault weapons. By allowing a less-informed respondent to think that non-assault weapons are actually assault weapons, an inaccurate, higher negative poll total will result.

What was even more astonishing was the assertion that “even half of the members of the National Rifle Association” were in favor of the extension of this law.

This statement is absolutely, unequivocally false. There is no factual basis to this statement.

An accurate assessment of the NRA’s membership would indicate that in excess of 90 percent definitely oppose the extension of the ban. This is primarily due to the fact that these people as a group, being vastly more familiar with firearms, and especially the firearms in question, than the persons making such assertions know very well that the ban is both ineffective and bad law, so bad as to be even constitutionally dubious.

Instapundit thinks supporting the ban is a loser for Bush.

Well, time’s running out on one of our favorite leftovers from the Clinton Years, aka the Assault Weapon’s Ban. I’ve just faxed some letters out to my Senators and my Congressman. Typically, our Senators’ votes cancel each other out on this issue (assuming Mr. Edwards isn’t too busy doing other stuff to show up), but my Congressman is…well, let’s just put it this way: he used to be a Poli-Sci prof.

Anyway, I was re-checking his contact info on his House.gov page, and I decided to glance at his bio. Turns out his wife is a director of something called North Carolinians Against Gun Violence. Their web page has the usual stuff: fear-mongering about the AWB sunset, lying about the “gun show loophole,” and so on.

One thing that caught my eye was this press release saying that Thirty-three Police Chiefs in North Carolina Call on Congress and President to Renew and Strengthen the Federal Assault Weapons Ban. These things just about write themselves: there’s the VPC “1 in 5″ lie. Here’s the “lethal spray of bullets” canard. And let’s not forget our old friend, “‘copycat’ assault weapons [that] are functionally identical to those banned by the 1994 law, which is why the ban must also be strengthened.”

So, for all our NC readers, here’s the List of scurrilous traitors concerned law-enforcement professionals who are willing to sell out your rights.

James has a good post at the Carnival on feeding those guns.

Blake alerts us to the phone-a-thon to keep the ban from being reauthorized:

To help ensure a steady flow throughout the day, I suggest that we stagger our calls.

If your last name begins with:

A – F: call between 9:30am – 11:00am eastern time.
G – L: call between 11:00am – 12:30pm eastern time.
M – S: call between 12:30pm – 2:00pm eastern time.
T – Z: call between 2:00pm – 3:30 eastern time.

Of course, this is merely a suggestion… don’t fret if you can’t call at your “designated” time. Just call at whatever time you can! Make these phone calls Tuesday, and Wednesday too if you can.

You can easily obtain your elected officials’ contact info here:

http://www.capwiz.com/nra/dbq/officials/

In addition, call the White House and state your opposition to renewing the ban. 202-456-1111. Though President Bush has expressed support for the ban in the past, he has not pushed Congress to pass a renewal, largely due to US. Take this opportunity to politely remind him of how important this issue is to us.

Jeff has his weekly check on the bias up. He makes a prediction that the ban will sunset. I hope he’s right. He’s counting on it since he’s shopping for a post-post-ban purchase.

Speaking of shopping, Hearltess Libertarian has his post-post-ban wish list.

And, since you’re all wondering, Uncle will build one of these, buy one of these, and either build or buy one of these. And I’ll stock up on regular capacity magazines.

Speaking of mags, if you need them refinished (after all, even gun owners have to accessorize!), go read this.

Tennessee won last night, 42-17. The new, two freshmen quarterback combo was pretty impressive. Man, Brent Schaeffer can fly. He’s got legs, baby, he’s everywhere. Ainge is more methodical and quite impressive. No word from Jim Bob Cooter, though.

Update: Newest fan

Another lame editorial that opens with:

You don’t need an assault weapon to defend your home and family against an intruder. Neither do you need one to go duck or deer hunting. What you need an assault weapon for is to commit murder and mayhem on a massive scale.

Which means you don’t need one at all. President Bush recognizes that, or at least he used to. “It makes no sense for assault weapons to be around our society,” he said while campaigning for the presidency four years ago.

What does need have to do with it? My AR15 does commit murder and mayhem on a massive scale to little pieces of paper. Then, it repeats the lies:

A more wrong-headed decision is hard to imagine. These weapons account for an extremely disproportionate percentage of gun violence because of their firepower and macho appeal. They are the weapon of choice in one of every five fatal shootings of police officers. They have no legitimate uses for private citizens and should have no place in civil society.

Wrong. They are used in less than 1% of crime (the most common weapons used in crime being 9mm semi-automatics and 357 revolvers, both handguns) and the one of every five fatal shootings of police officers has been debunked. Both of these facts come from the Violence Policy Center.

Do some actual reporting instead of repeating the talking points of an anti gun organization.

This article opens with:

The recent killing of Indianapolis police officer Jake Laird has pushed to the forefront the dangers created by the manufacturing and dissemination of assault weapons to civilians.

Kenneth Anderson killed Laird with an assault rifle after purchasing the military-style semiautomatic a year ago in what was defined as a legal transaction.

Anderson first killed his mother, then shot four officers who responded to the shooting spree.

The incident caused law enforcement personnel to push for training on similar weapons. Fighting fire with fire is an understandable response. Most metropolitan police forces already are trained on assault weapons.

But the ultimate solution should be to extinguish the fire.

A federal law in 1994 banned the sale of specific assault weapons, but it didn’t take gun manufacturers long to circumvent a law that features as many loopholes as our disgusting tax code.

The federal ban is set to expire Sept. 13.

Huh? If the purchase was defined as a legal transaction, then it was not an assault weapon as those are currently banned. It is not defined as a legal transaction, it is a legal transaction.

On September 9, the Brady Campaign will have a phone-a-thon to call the White House and demand Bush push for the assault weapons ban renewal. Pro gun folks need to call too. Here’s the number: (202) 456-1111.

Long, long ago when the web was young, I used my university Unix account to set up a “home page.” Back then, it was all the rage to have a bunch of links to other cool home pages (well, I guess that’s still all the rage).

One of the cool links I had was to something called (IIRC) “Brian Yoder’s Art Page.” He had tons of images of paintings by late 19th Century artists—I forget if there was any name for the movement, but I would call it Romantic/Realist/Humanist. The site also seemed to have sort of an Objectivist orientation. If I had known how to automate downloading everything from a website back then, I would have done it with this one.

As the years went by, I had less time to revisit this site, and eventually the link I had went the way of all links, and was no more. I was a little disappointed, but these things happen. I would have googled for some of the artists, but I wasn’t sure of the names, and anyway, there was bloggin’ to get done (and other stuff).

Now Dean Esmay has a post about female beauty, and he focuses on the paintings of one William Bouguereau (heh..that guy needs an “x” on the end of his name). When I saw the pictures, I knew in an instant that this must have been one of the artists from Brian Yoder’s page. At the end of the post, Dean had a link to a site called the Art Renewal Center, which hosts tons of images of various artists—many of which looked familiar. I clicked around on some articles, and lo-and-behold: there’s Brian Yoder!

Turns out he’s on the Board of Trustees of the ARC, and he has an art blog which also has some of the old site’s pages as archives! Sweet! Thanks, Dean, for hooking me up with an old favorite.

PS: As always, with art, De gustibus non est disputandum.

Company is coming. I’m smoking a Boston Butt and we’re mopping it up with Mango Barbecue Sauce (recipe later, if you want it). Trying these for the first time today as an appetizer. Ingredients:

12 Jalapeño Peppers, cut long ways, stemmed and seeded.
12 pieces of bacon
Cream cheese
Cumin
Garlic powder
Kosher salt
Fresh ground pepper

After cutting the peppers long ways (you will have 24 halves, fill 12 of the halves with a dollop of cream cheese. Put a dash of garlic powder and cumin on the cream cheese. Put the peppers back together. Wrap each pepper with a slice of bacon (Everything is better with bacon). Use a toothpick to hold them together. Salt and pepper the bacon. Grill until bacon is done.

I’ll let you know how they are.

Update: Quite tasty. The peppers I used (which I grew myself) are possibly the hottest Jalapeños I’ve ever had. I can eat hot stuff with the best of them and these got a bit too hot for me. I only ate three and no one else would try them. Milder peppers are a must. I do recommend them because they have good flavor but these peppers were damn hot.

Jed has The Weekly Fusillade, #4 up.

By now you’ve seen this horrendous act of media bias where a reporter totally makes up that a crowd attending a Bush event booed when Bush, referring to Bill Clinton’s pending heart surgery, said He’s is in our thoughts and prayers.

Powerline says it best:

Is this the most astonishing example of media bias I can remember? Offhand, yes. It is sheer, malicious fabrication and slander–of President Bush and of Republicans generally–in what purports to be a brief, factual account of Bush’s speech.

Someone needs to get fired. Turns out the reporter, Scott Lindlaw, has done other stupid, biased things in the past.

My thoughts and prayers to the Russians who have endured a terrifying few weeks including plane crashes, bombings, and the recent school massacre. 200 dead and many were children. It truly shows how sickening these terrorists are.

Remember that it can happen here. As Phelps says When, not if:

It will happen here. This was effective. Too effective. The next one will be here, and it will be even more effective. The people who plan this sort of thing will use better explosives with a better system to detonate it when the assault begins.

Do you know why they picked a school? Body mass. They knew that any amount of gas like the Russians used in the Moscow Theater episode that would put down the terrorists would be a deadly dose for the children.

Sadly, I think he’s right. I only wonder why it hasn’t happened yet.

Kyer has much more and some powerful images.

Reuters reports Clinton checked into a hospital and will undergo a quadruple bypass. Best wishes, Bill.

I wonder how long before someone questions the timing of this?

The Brady Campaign released this:

We need your help! Please contact President Bush on Thursday, September 9th, 2004, and tell him to renew the assault weapons ban.

There are only a few days until the assault weapons ban expires on September 13, and our nation will face a new era of criminal and terrorist attacks with assault weapons unless President Bush keeps his campaign promise and gets the law renewed. During his campaign in 2000, President Bush pledged to renew this law. But so far he has done nothing to prevent military style weapons like AK-47s and UZIs from flooding back into our neighborhoods.

HOW YOU CAN HELP:

STEP 1: CALL
On Thursday, September 9th, 2004, call the White House between the hours of 9am and 5pm ET (6am-2pm PT) at 202-456-1111. Tell the President to listen to law enforcement and renew the ban on assault weapons before it expires on Monday, September 13th.

STEP 2: EMAIL
Please forward this action alert to everyone in your email address book! We must spread the word to make this work! (Because of the Labor Day weekend, you may want to send out reminders next Tuesday or Wednesday as well.)

I think we pro gun folks should do the same thing. Start calling and tell Bush to oppose extending the ban.

The latest is up. Note to self: Send something next time.

Gunner lists some contests you can enter to win everything from a shotgun to a 50 caliber rifle. Excellent.

Tim’s post on Kellermann, which I mentioned here, is back. Tim, regarding my objection to Kellermann, notes:

Kellermann clearly notes this problem in his 1986 study, which also discounts gun misuse that does not result in death. This was one of the reasons why he did the 1993 study which does measure self-protection that does not result in death.

I have not read the 1993 study and am unable to look for it right now. I will do it later. But, to be clear, the 1986 study was creation science. Kellermann knew the conclusion he wanted and worked the data to get those results. He can, of course, fall back on the fact his claims are technically correct (they are) while his supporters and detractors misrepresent the results. Gun control types make the incorrect claim and pro gun people debunk the bogus claim (because it’s easy). Or has XRLQ says in comments:

In any event, I do think there is something wrong with studying an issue almost no one cares about, but which is likely to be mistaken for a different issue people really do care about. Any potential gun owner wishing to weigh the pros and cons of gun ownership for self defense will be ill served by the study. Come to think of it, even the rare sicko who dreams of “bagging a burglar” will be, as the study does not control for the fact that most gun owners don’t think (or act) that way.

Assuming that the data was sound and the methodology was impeccable, the most Dr. Kellermann may have accomplished is to prove once and for all that if you ask a stupid question, you really will get a stupid answer.

Tennesse Ruck and wife are slated to leave China. Congrats. It’s wonderful news.

Good speech for people who want the government to give them stuff. Dubya is leading the Republican party to rival the Democrat party in terms of growing the leviathan. Grants, home loans, pooling insurance, job training, healthcare, gimme, gimme, gimme, etc. There is now no party of small government (well, excluding third parties).

On a positive, he wants to simplify the tax code. Even though I’m an accountant, I’m all for it. He didn’t say anything about dissolving the IRS so don’t get your hopes up. When the government says simplify, it usually means make more confusing.

Update: Oh yeah. How could I forget fighting terror? Another positive as far as I’m concerned.

Headline: Man Stopped With Rocket Launchers In Downtown Denver

What he really had were two rocket launchers that were decommissioned. They didn’t work. Once fired, they are mostly harmless. Yet:

The man was taking them to his son in Chicago, but police confiscated them, even though they are legal. Officers were worried the sight of the rocket launchers might cause panic among those who didn’t know they were already used.

Huh? They took his legally owned property? Hell, just put them in his trunk.

How many times have we heard that one from Kerry and his supporters. Yet, in a flip flop, Kerry now has lashed out at Bush and Cheney’s lack of service:

I will not have my commitment to defend this country questioned by those who refused to serve when they could have and who misled America into Iraq

And then there is this quote:

For the past week, they attacked my patriotism and my fitness to serve as commander in chief

At the convention, they did attack your fitness to serve as commander in chief. However, the first bit is pretty much a lie. Kerry has exaggerated (or made up) the claim that they attacked his patriotism at the convention. When you exaggerate your opponents’ arguments, they are easy to refute.

Here’s a short and fairly accurate article on the assault weapons ban that actually addresses the fact that there isn’t much difference between pre and post ban weapons:

Some see the military style AR 15 as an assault weapon, while others claim it is only a varmint rifle. Either way the AR 15 is legal in Oregon. “They’re very popular,” says Marvin Loy, owner of SM Gunshop in North Eugene.

He explains that this semi-automatic firearm (one shot at a time) does not face restrictions under the federal assault weapons ban because of a few minor differences that some say are only cosmetic. “They said that this firearm here could have a couple items but it couldn’t have three,” explains Loy. “It couldn’t have a flash hider on the end, it couldn’t have a bayonet lug if it had a pistol grip. So they took these two off and left the pistol grip. That’s the same gun.”

The law limits new ammunition magazines to 10 bullets, but even 50 round magazines that were made before the ban went into effect are still legal. Loy says despite its appearance, the destructiveness of the AR 15 does not come close to that of a more acceptable hunting rifle, which is also semi-automatic. “It all comes down to appearance,” he says. “This is why they stopped it, because they look bad.” And at about $700, the military style rifle is available to anyone who is over 18 and passes a federal background check.

No mention of machine guns, AK47s, the children or blood in the streets.

Council Bluffs, Iowa has been contemplating breed specific legislation for a while. Here’s my entries about it. It was defeated. However, it looks like the city council is at it again:

For a second time, the Council Bluffs City Council will consider a proposed city ordinance that would ban pit bull terriers.

The proposed ordinance failed on a two-two vote at the council’s August 9th meeting. It will be considered again October 11th.

Councilman Chad Primmer, who was absent from the August 9th meeting, says he is for the ban.

Mayor Tom Hanafan can veto the ordinance if approved.

There have been 19 pit bull attacks in the Council Bluffs this year.

We’ve seen land taken via eminent domain to build a Wal-Mart before, but in a new twist, someone is trying to take land from Wal-Mart for a university:

Rowan University plans to take developers involved in a project to build a Wal-Mart in Harrison Township back to court in an effort to take 115 acres slated for the shopping center by eminent domain.

In a lawsuit filed in Superior Court last week, Rowan University claims it has offered $8.38 million for two rural properties near the interchange of routes 55 and 322 where the developers have proposed building the shopping plaza.

The documents seek to condemn the property and to allow the state university to acquire the land through eminent domain.

Rowan’s suit is the latest development in a legal battle between the Wal-Mart developers and Rowan University over the farmland that has drawn on for more than two years.

Last year, Superior Court Assignment Judge George H. Stanger Jr. denied a similar request by Rowan to condemn the property –then owned by a local farmer who had contracted to sell the land to the Turnersville-based American Continental Properties. Stanger ruled that the state university had failed to adequately negotiate for the land.