Three Illinois police officers have been charged with illegally possessing machine guns:

Three Illinois State Police officers, who could legally handle submachine guns for their jobs, have been charged with violating federal firearms regulations for allegedly having them at home, officials announced Tuesday.

The troopers – two assigned to District 11 at Collinsville and one to District 18 at Litchfield – were placed on paid leave while their cases are handled in federal court in East St. Louis.

Also charged is a doctor, formerly of Glen Carbon, who allegedly lent one of the weapons to a trooper who said he test-fired it and gave it back.

There is no allegation that the men trafficked in illicit weapons or committed any crime beyond illegally possessing them. Authorities would not say what launched the investigation or how federal agents found out about the weapons.

Notice how the charges are minimized a bit in the reporting, no doubt due to the fact they’re police officers. Another article on the situation notes:

Trent said the three accused troopers could have lawfully possessed the machine guns if they were assigned to them as part of their work duties, but they could not have them as private citizens.

[snip]

On Dec. 22, when Illinois State Police agents searched the residence where Griffiths now lives in Spaulding, they found the machine gun, which had been converted illegally to a fully automatic firearm.

The complaint charges that Griffith admitted to having fired the weapon on at least two occasions, He also admitted to having loaned the weapon to Yard in October. Agents seized some other firearms from the Spaulding residence.

A record check revealed that Griffiths had not registered the guns, the complaint said.

Mugge and Griffiths both are accused of owning Colt AR-15 SP1 models, with Mugge’s able to fire as an automatic weapon when a piece of metal was inserted and Griffiths’ illegally converted to fire automatically.

No one is above the law but I can’t help wondering if the facts of this case could be used to challenge The Hughes Amendment, which bans the transfer of new machine guns to civilians. After all, the cops in this case seem to be fine, upstanding people except for their illegal possession of machine guns.

At The Day, they’re discussing gun violence:

“Illegal guns don’t grow on trees,” said Brian Malte of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. “They are systematically and methodically diverted to illegal markets.”

Guns used in crimes are usually stolen or obtained through a “straw purchase,” where a person legally buys a gun, then sells it illegally. Only three states — California, Oregon and Massachusetts — make it illegal for a person to buy more than one handgun a month, Malte said. Four states require that people report stolen guns.

Actually, I’d guess that significantly more crime guns are stolen or bought from individuals than obtained through straw purchases. More:

For the third time, the Connecticut Legislature is considering a bill this year that would require gun owners to report stolen guns. This step, and other measures to improve record keeping, would lead to more responsible gun owners and fewer guns circulating on the black market, Malte said.

I don’t really see how cracking down on people who have had their guns stolen is all that beneficial. Why not require anyone who has anything stolen to report it? Anyway, this bill will not lead to more responsible gun owners and fewer guns circulating on the black market. How could it? It will not make anyone more responsible and guns will still be stolen. Even more:

Current laws make it difficult for police to track stolen guns and thwart “intervention and prevention” measures like intelligence sharing, said Joe Vince, president of the national organization Crime Gun Solutions.

Police don’t begin a magical process of tracking a gun when it is reported stolen. Instead, when someone uses it in a crime later, the police will know it was stolen. Not the most effective preventative measure, in my opinion.

Parting thought: the article is filled with quotes from anti-gunners but not a single pro-gun person. The media seems to think the anti-gun lobby are experts whereas the pro-gun activists (see how I did that?) are not consulted.

Here, I talked about mine. TriggerFinger tackles the issue:

We’re likely to see one of the two cases in the DC circuit at present before the Supreme Court. That will likely result in a ruling that proclaims an individual right. The question is how strong the decision would be; there’s little question that a correct legal reading of the Constitution forbids the DC laws, though there’s always the question of whether the Justices will vote in accordance with the obvious.

There’s more. Go read. He also has the most extensive coverage of the Seegars case and the Parker case that I’ve seen.

In an update to Fumento not disclosing grants from corporations, Michael Fumento tells his side of the story:

They realized they might eliminate more of their critics by simply accusing them of being paid corporate shills, and then siccing the media on them to see what they could dig up. They assembled an “enemies list,” giving it to reporters at publications including the New York Times and Business Week. I have locked horns with green groups for the past 15 years and earned a spot on that list.

I was first called by a Times reporter in late December, who accused me of writing a pay-for-play column. I flatly and truthfully denied it. The reporter was flummoxed, having nothing more than an accusation to work with. She kept digging but found nothing.

Regardless of the motivation to turn the media dogs loose on him, he should have disclosed which side his bread was buttered on. Two wrongs and all of that.

Via Jon

Update: In comments, Fumento writes:

Thanks for the mention, but regarding full exclosure (sic) I have seen similar words elsewhere and it belies ignorance (I mean that literally, not as in “stupidity”) of both how think tanks work and how the rules worked prior to the new ones invented by Business Week’s Eamon Javers. Think tanks make their money by soliciting donations. They can be from the government, individuals, philanthropies, or corporations. They usually expect the fellows (the thinkers) to take an active role in this. Money comes into the think tank, part goes to overhead, part to building the endowment, and part to the fellow in the form of salary, benefits, and paperclips and note pads. This was no different. The money went to Hudson, which pays my salary. But precisely because I have been able to raise NO corporate donations in 4-5 years, Hudson has been paying me out of overhead. So in a real sense I’m drawing from grants I know not which. “Full disclosure” sounds great, like “Can’t we all get along.” But for the most part it’s inpracticable (sic). That’s why you can read 100 columns and op-eds in a week, many from think tankers, and never see a full disclosure statement. This rule was made up on-the-spot to apply to me. I could go on about how the grant was solicited for a book in 1999 and spent by 2000 and that I didn’t even begin my column with Scripps until 2003, which does raise the point of: Just HOW LONG do you have to disclose these things. But I think the point is made.

Sounds reasonable to me.

Erik Streib, M.D. is unhappy that a recent John Stossel column said that exaggerated gun violence was a media fed myth. I think Stossel is pretty much right. Streib writes:

Commentator John Stossel made claims based on a misrepresentation of data and presented conclusions that cannot be supported by facts. Most disturbing was his implication that the risk of gun violence to children is exaggerated. In reporting that less than 100 children ages 15 and younger die annually due to gun accidents, he ignores the more than 500 deaths due to intentional injuries and the approximately 3,000 non-fatal firearm injuries in this group.

That’s because Stossel was addressing gun accidents with children, which always make the news and are quite rare.

The Bush administration asked Google to turn over internet search data in an effort to revive a law that has been struck down in court. Google has told them to get stuffed. Good for them:

Nicole Wong, Google’s associate general counsel, countered: “Google is not a party to this lawsuit, and the demand for the information is overreaching.”

The AP:

Advocacy groups and parents are suing the Nickelodeon TV network and cereal maker Kellogg Co. in an effort to stop junk food marketing to kids.

The plaintiffs are citing a recent report documenting the influence of marketing on what children eat. Ads aimed at kids are mostly for high-calorie, low-nutrition food and drinks, according to the government-chartered Institute of Medicine.

Wakefield, Mass., mother Sherri Carlson said she tries her best to get her three kids to eat healthy foods.

“But then they turn on Nickelodeon and see all those enticing junk-food ads,” Carlson said. “Adding insult to injury, we enter the grocery store and see our beloved Nick characters plastered on all those junky snacks and cereals.”

Here’s an idea: When you’re at the store, don’t buy your kid the jumbo pack of Ho Hos, the pack of Oreo Double Stufs, and a 12 pack of Mountain Dew. Your kids’ nutrition and diet habits begin with you.

The AP:

Al-Jazeera on Thursday broadcast portions of an audiotape purportedly from Osama bin Laden, saying al-Qaida is making preparations for attacks in the United States but offering a possible truce to rebuild Iraq and Afghanistan.

The voice on the tape said heightened security in the United States is not the reason there have been no attacks there since the Sept. 11, 2001, suicide hijackings.

Instead, the reason is “because there are operations that need preparations,” he said.

First, I tend to doubt that the voice is Bin Laden. Second, it seems to imply that the much maligned flypaper afterthought, err, strategy is a consideration. See, a truce in Iraq and Afghanistan would mean they could devote their efforts to killing us white devils here in the west. So the guy claiming to be OBL wants to partially make nice and that is probably because things in Iraq and Afghanistan aren’t going the way they want.

Heightened security in the US can’t really deter all attacks. Our plan of confiscating toe-nail clippers and wiretapping of questionable legality is probably not effective so I tend to think they are in the planning stage.

CCW has once again made it to Governor Doyle’s desk:

The state Senate approved a Republican bill that would let Wisconsin residents carry concealed weapons, setting up what could be a fierce political clash between the Legislature and Gov. Jim Doyle.

The Senate’s 28-5 vote Tuesday sends the bill to Doyle, a Democrat who already has vetoed one version of it and has vowed to veto this one.

“The governor believes people carrying loaded weapons around will make Wisconsin less safe,” Doyle spokeswoman Melanie Fonder said.

But Republicans say people should be allowed to fight off criminals.

Wisconsin is one of only four states that bans concealed weapons. National Rifle Association lobbyists working with Republican legislators have been trying make carrying concealed weapons legal here for years.

There’s talk that the Republicans have enough pull to override the veto. Good.

A Garand in 338 Win Mag! Not sure it’d be good as a military sniper since I don’t think an appropriate scope can be mounted on it correctly (think they have to be off center due to the Garand’s design). Still, it’s pretty cool.

Apparently, not:

The Supreme Court today rejected an appeal from an anti-war protester who was convicted of violating the boundaries of a “restricted area” established during President Bush’s visit to South Carolina in 2002.

Brett Bursey had urged the justices to hear the appeal of a $500 fine he was assessed for entering a restricted area at near airport hangar in West Columbia on Oct. 24, 2002. In July 2005, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Bursey’s conviction in U.S. v. Bursey.
….
A Secret Service agent told Bursey he could protest in a designated demonstration area a half-mile away. When he refused to leave the restricted area, he was arrested.

Marc says Give me back my Constitution.

David Hardy has some more on the ATF NFRTR records nonsense.

Les reports that Winchester is shutting down its plant unless it can find a buyer. He also notes that Smith and Wesson is entering the AR-15 market.

Ravenwood is taking a break. Hurry back.

Does the AP even try to be accurate with the gun facts anymore? Seriously:

The machine gun ban is meant to rid Hawaii of sniper-type assault weapons, which are nearly five feet long and use 50-caliber shells.

I tell you, I got get me one of them 50 caliber, sniper-type assault weapon machine guns. It’s right there, next to the goose that lays golden eggs, pixie dust, and the science of global warming.

Hell, I’d vote for him.

Publicola details the tedious task of transporting a firearm across state lines and staying legal:

If I were to follow each state’s law about car carrying I would have to pull over at each state line & make sure I was in compliance

There’s a lot more.

Les and wife are expecting. Must be something in the water here in Blount County.

Looks like the dueling gun shows may have come to an end. For the first time since December, the RK and Mike Holloway gun shows are not on the same weekend.

Eric Larson over at subguns.com thinks so:

For the past several weeks, ATF has apparently instructed its Inspectors not to review any NFA records during compliance audits—they are to examine Title I records only. I’ve heard enough from sources I deem reliable to post this.

What’s going on?

A number of things. First, I am sure y’all recall the post-Waco phrase: “We don’t want Special Agents going around talking or providing information, because we don’t want to create any evidence that could be subpoenaed.” Second, the timing coincides with the public release and posting of the sworn testimony of ATF Inspector George Semoniak [link added - Ed.] at the Wrenn trial. Specifically, as the summary posted with this document states:

In the case United States vs Wrenn (Cr. No. 1:04-045), District of South Carolina, Aiken Division, ATF Inspector George Semonick testified under oath that “there was a discrepancy” between firearms records maintained by defendant Wrenn and those maintained in the NFRTR by ATF. Inspector Semonick also confirmed “that the records, the records kept by ATF, were deficient.” Defendant Wrenn was not charged with any record-keeping violations.

Third, I’ve also heard chatter that ATF suspending record-keeping checks of Class III dealer records on Title II firearms/devices, is a prelude to ATF swooping down and seizing/forfeiting a bunch of NFA firearms/devices. I strongly believe ATF is NOT going to seize/forfeit any NFA firearms/devices under the present conditions because, among other reasons, the NFRTR is under a Congressional microscope at the moment. For ATF to seize/forfeit any NFA firearms/devices at this time would likely invite further destruction of ATF as an institution.

Note that I said “further destruction.” The reason is that ATF is currently doing what the military calls a “damage-limiting operation.” ATF is seriously damaged right now, and ATF’s top executives are trying to limit that damage.

There are things going on regarding ATF’s administration of the NFA that go far beyond and are apart from anything I’ve posted here regarding the NFRTR. Those things are in progress right now, and I’ll leave it to others who are directly involved in them to comment publicly on them in their own way(s) and time(s).

Finally, as always, I’d like to urge any of you who are concerned about the foregoing or anything else pertaining to the NFRTR, to consider contacting your Congressional representatives. Be sure and request your Congressional representatives to contact Sen. Arlen Specter, Chairman, Senate Committee on the Judiciary, which is currently involved in matters involving oversight of ATF. Apparently, a sealed subpoena has been served by the Committee on ATF. I am endeavoring to find out more details, but think some others who are following this may scoop me, which is OK. There’s plenty of information to go around.

At the Wrenn trial, an agent testified the the NFRTR (the registry of NFA weapons) was not accurate. The NFA community has alerted congress and, as such, the ATF folks may be in damage control mode. We’ll see.

Look out! He’s got a pistol grip!

I covered the recent announcement of increased gun control in Illinois here. Here’s the press release from the governor. It contains this bit:

We are grateful for their efforts to keep us safe from the threat posed by weapons with a high capacity magazine, silencer, automatic trigger with a pistol grip and the other dangerous features of such insidious weapons,” said Jennifer Bishop of the Brady Campaign To Prevent Handgun Violence.

This assault weapons ban doesn’t cover suppressors (or silencers). Automatic trigger? I think she means automatic fire control group, which have been heavily regulated since 1934 and banned in weapons since 1986. And, oh yeah, this assault weapons ban wouldn’t cover machine guns, which is what she’s intimating. And a pistol grip is dangerous?

In the debate over concealed carry in Nebraska, a journo asks an odd question:

According to the FBI, there were 1,095 arrests for weapons violations in Nebraska in 2004.

How does that compare with states of similar size?

Very high. The average number of such arrests among 11 states of similar size was 532 — nearly half the Nebraska tally. Only Utah, with 1,171, had more.

“I can’t put my finger on why we are higher, unless other states are just more lenient,” said Michael Behm, executive director of the Nebraska Crime Commission.

Probably because, uhm, other states have CCW laws and most violations for weapons involve carrying when you’re not supposed to? Just a guess. There’s also this bit:

The groups that oppose handgun proliferation are not spending money in Nebraska.

The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence has not reported sending money to Nebraska candidates with the Accountability and Disclosure Commission. State senators who consistently oppose the conceal-carry bill say they don’t get money from national anti-gun proliferation groups.

The groups once had a lobbyist in Nebraska. Paul O’Hara was hired by Handgun Control for about $5,000 a year in the 90s. “They were a hand-to-mouth operation,” he says.

Later, the Brady campaign hired his lobbying firm to fight the conceal-carry bills, he said. But this year no lobbyist represents that point of view.

Couple things: 1) it looks like the Bradies have given up on Nebraska. And 2) expect proliferation to be the new anti-gun buzzword from now on with all the yammering at the UN. Mark it.

US Senate Candidate Paul Hackett notes that The Democratic Party is wrong on the Second Amendment. In reference to why someone should be allowed to own an assault weapon, he says:

It’s just damn fun

Cool. We need more Democrats like that. His website is here.

Update: Or maybe not.

Every other Saturday, me and my homies get together to play some Texas Hold ‘Em. And by play some Texas Hold ‘Em, I mean we sit around, talk shit, and drink adult beverages. There’s usually between five and eight guys and we put in $10, winner take all. It never works that way because the house rules have some low blinds, which makes the game last longer than it should. Usually the top two guys wind up splitting. I was always one of the top two guys. But the last two times, I came in third. I’ve lost my mojo. I think it happened when my brother-in-law really bluffed the shit out of me and then showed me his cards to rub it in. Anyway, here’s hoping I get my mojo back.

Last game, one of my buds said that he thought my posts about Laurie Berkner’s kind-of-hotness were funny. I told him I was serious (girls got moves). He almost fell out of his seat laughing. Then, day before yesterday, my wife asks me who this Laurie Berkner person is that I was yammering on about on my blog. I told her it was some lady who sings kids’ songs on Noggin. She didn’t know who she was. Yesterday, one of Laurie’s videos came on during Jack’s Big Music Show (which Junior happens to love) and I said That’s Laurie Berkner! She looked at me like I was nuts and said she’s not hot. I said She’s kinda hot.

The wife then tells me that it’s not any jealousy sort of thing. And tells me that she knows I find Lucy Liu hot and she concurs that Lucy Liu is in fact hot. However, she says Laurie Berkner definitely is not hot. So, maybe it is just me.

Tennessee Republicans apparently grew a set:

A special committee of the Tennessee Senate voted this evening to void the special election for state Senate District 29 that Ophelia Ford of Memphis won by just 13 votes last year. The matter now goes to the Senate floor Thursday. After nearly three hours of heated debate, the resolution succeeded 17-to-14.

Via Marc, who notes it is freaking amazing.

Spell with Flikr:

Pretty cool. Via Der Commissar.

Joe reports that a magazine in the UK wants to send someone to cover Boomershoot. Cool.

Jeff has the latest on anti-gun bias in the media.

So says CNS news:

The City of Seattle is running a help-wanted ad for a “Crime Gun Program Coordinator,” who will “develop, maintain and coordinate a centralized and regionally comprehensive crime gun database” and “integrate” that data with other law enforcement databases.

The person hired for the job also will “assist in the development of local and regional strategies to stop illegal gun trafficking and related gun violence.”

A Second Amendment group says don’t be fooled — the person hired for the job will be the Seattle Police Department’s “official gun control advocate,” and as such, he or she will be expected to “create and advocate gun control schemes under the guise of stopping criminal misuse of firearms.”

I’ve never understood the term crime gun database. Aren’t the guns known to be used in crimes usually in police custody? Also, the ad does seem to intimate wanting a gun control advocate as pro-gun folks would see the foolishness involved in this plan.

The AP:

AP Poll: Blacks Likelier to Celebrate MLK

And whites apparently notice that the banks aren’t open.

In other, other news: SayUncle discovers that Likelier is a real word.

Tom says:

When you show me the part of the Constitution that enumerates the federal government’s power to regulate in-state medical issues, I’ll let you go back to arguing that Scalia and Thomas are OI strict constructionists. Until then, it looks to me like they’re at least as willing to set aside constitutional philosophy for personal preference as any other justice.

Equally laughable are Ginsburg’s and Souter’s recent love of states rights.

Update: The Clam is happy to have lost.

The AP:

Civil liberties groups filed lawsuits in two cities Tuesday seeking to block President Bush’s domestic eavesdropping program, arguing the electronic surveillance of American citizens was unconstitutional.

The U.S. District Court lawsuits were filed in New York by the Center for Constitutional Rights and in Detroit by the
American Civil Liberties Union.

The New York suit, filed on behalf of the center and individuals, names President Bush, the head of the National Security Agency, and the heads of the other major security agencies, challenging the NSA’s surveillance of persons within the United States without judicial approval or statutory authorization.

It seeks an injunction that would prohibit the government from conducting surveillance of communications in the United States without warrants.

Going to be interesting to watch.

Daley/Blagojevich are pushing an assault weapons ban for the state of Illinois:

CHICAGO Governor Rod Blagojevich (bluh-GOY’-uh-vitch) and Chicago Mayor Richard Daley are renewing their call for a statewide assault weapons ban.
Both leaders plan to appear at a rally in Chicago (at 12:15) this afternoon alongside state and local legislators and the victims of gun violence.

Blagojevich and Daley have been pressing for the ban since the federal measure expired more than a year ago.

The law would prohibit the manufacture, possession and delivery of semiautomatic weapons, assault weapon attachments and the 50-caliber assault rifle.

Gun control works so well. Just ask Chicago which has some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation yet is neck and neck with DC (also some of the strictest gun laws in the nation) for the title of murder capitol each year.

Pronounced bo bo

That’s Junior’s latest word. When she sees a sore of some kind on someone, she points out their boo boo. She likes to point out hers too but she rarely gets them. The other day she tore off at top speed through the den and took a nasty spill. Much crying ensued. I picked her up and told her she was OK. She looked at me like Don’t tell me I’m OK. Then I noticed she had a small little rug burn on her leg and I pointed to it and said You have a boo boo. She immediately stopped crying and got excited while pointing to it and yelling bo bo. She was happy to have a boo boo. Kids today.

I’m with Les. I can’t really take Al Gore seriously regarding his criticism of warrantless wiretaps. Maybe if he’d taken a stand against his boss in 1994 over this, he’d be a bit credible. The NYT has apparently changed its tune too.

Hack meet hack.

There’s no turning back, now. Welcome Tam to the dark side. She has assembled her first AR-15 lower.

*title of post is the annoying code I needed to enter a comment there.

Getting on 35 this year, things are changing. I used to go to bed and could sleep all night (even excessive hours) and never once had to get up to go to the bathroom. I’d hold it all night and, then, pee like a mule in the morning. I guess bladders shrink as you age because now I get up at about 5:30 (like clockwork) to pee every night. Feh.

Also, I used to sleep buck naked. Then, after the baby and getting up frequently at night, I started sleeping in boxers. Now, like an 80 year old grandmother who has caught a chill, I sleep in a T-shirt and pajama pants. Not sure why but maybe my circulation isn’t as good. Or the fact the pregnant wife keeps the house chilly since she’s always hot.

Thankfully, my little friend still wakes up before I do (if you know what I mean). If that stops happening, I’ll be depressed.

CounterTop has announced the rules for the gun blog awards. The small print may get you, since, like me, you probably can’t read it. So, head on over and nominate your favorites.

Denise has a lot more on Individual Rights Vs. “Reasonable Restrictions”:

So, we gunnies can’t really rely on Courts to solve our problems—although they could be a piece of the puzzle. We must demand our legislators, city councilman, state officials, and others honor our rights. We must make our voices heard at all levels of government.

For evidence of that, look no further than the Kelo decision.

Adrian on why he wouldn’t be good at a political debate if he ran for office:

Moderator: Adrian, what do you think about high taxes?
Adrian: They totally suck, dude.
Moderator: Uh, you have 45 more seconds, sir.

Heh.

Via David Hardy, a Million Mom March organizer in New Jersey is a convicted sex offender.

The Office of National Drug Control Policy decides to to podcasts. Their first interview is with Al Roker.

Been mulling some options for an optic for the 9mm AR-15 project. Not too keen on putting a $300+ optic on a range plinker. So, I was looking at some other options. Plus the recoil on a 9mm isn’t that great so something heavy duty isn’t completely necessary. Then I found the SPOT torture test on AR15.com. There’s some pics of an M4 being thrown about 20 feet in the air. The SPOT survived the drop, whereas the drop shattered a buffer tube and a MagPul grip. Mounting Solutions has the SPOT and cantilever mount for $149. I’d say plenty adequate for a plinker.

BTW, I saw this bad boy by IOR Valdada at CCA this weekend. It is slick! It can function as a CQB optic and as a midrange scope.

Are up over at Inside Larry’s Head.

Seriously:

Poll: Concerns Shift From Economy to War

Economic worries have decreased over the last six months as the American public has shifted its concern more to the war in
Iraq and problems faced by political leaders, AP-Ipsos polling found.

The economy has been showing signs of strength in recent months. But the violence in Iraq has continued, before and after the latest round of elections in mid-December. And high-profile politicians in this country have been ensnared by scandal.

I guess we can’t come out and say something like The economy is improving.

But this quiz says I am. Of course, the framing of the questions/answers doesn’t really reflect my point of view accurately. Via AC.

Condi Rice again says she’s not going to run for president.

The Pro-Gun Progressive notes that shall-issue CCW is being introduced in the house in Maryland. He’s asking pro-gunners to show up and support the measure. Maryland has may issue (i.e., if you’re a politico or in cushy with one, you can pack heat). As packing.org states:

In MD it is almost impossible for a non-resident to get a permit. For that matter most MD residents can’t either.

Dan McKown, the CCW permit holder who confronted the Tacoma mall shooter and was shot, has walked out of the hospital despite worries he would suffer from paraplegia. Xavier and Mr. Completely have the skinny. On the way out, he said:

At least you know I have a backbone

Yes, we do.

They already exist, of course. Toy guns that look realistic are usually required to have orange paint on the tip. It’s easily removed and some folks do that. If I were a particularly bastardish mugger, I might paint my real gun’s barrel tip orange. Head notes a push to make it illegal to remove the orange paint from toy guns. In light of recent events, I suppose this was inevitable. The killing of the eighth grader who went to school with a toy gun is tragic.

Jeff highlights that a the worldwide gun control debate is happening.

Via Jeff, comes this:

There’s an obvious thread here that members of Congress choose not to see: The all-too-free flow of handguns, a warped way of life that cows presidents and members of Congress who ought to recognize that the availability of handguns is murderous. The problem is that Americans own 65 million handguns and the only effective safety measure would be a ban on these made-for-murder weapons. As writer Jenny Price noted in a Dec. 25 op-ed in The Post, only 160 of the 12,000 guns used to kill people every year are employed in legitimate self-defense; guns in the home are used seven times more often for homicide than for self-defense.

Two fabrications in one paragraph. The number is more like 700,000. I think Ms. Price only thinks legitimate self-defense involves killing someone.

First, in an update to this, Michele emails me to let me know that she thinks those emails came from another site and apologized. Cool. Thanks. She also provides some perspective on why she’s supportive of the bill as written.

And _Jon don’t feel bad about creating conflict. That’s why some bloggers blog to begin with. No need to feel bad for me, I’m pretty think-skinned and actually enjoyed the exchange with Michele. She’s a smart person and it’s fun to discuss stuff with her.

Tim Lambert, sporting new blog digs, reports that Scripps Howard News Service has severed its relationship with Michael Fumento for not disclosing he received payments from an agribusiness firm. I guess Marmaduke is in the lead now.

It doesn’t look like he personally benefited but the appearance of impropriety is there.

Update: Yes, he benefited but that’s because the grant paid his salary. Doesn’t look as though he personally received a big chunk of change.

David makes one:

A Second Amendment case will be heard by the Supreme Court in the next few years, and it will confirm an individual right. However, the ruling will be so narrow that it will not override state interest claims. It will not require a strict scrutiny standard, but rather an intermediate one. And it will certainly not overturn “assault weapon” bans, open the door for viable challenges to permitting schemes, or declare registration mandates, background checks, and similar prior restraints unconstitutional infringements.

In short, we will achieve a “status quo,” where the vast majority of “existing gun laws” are deemed enforceable and prosecutable, rather than repealable.

I’m not sure how affirmation of an individual right could not lead to successful challenges of various gun control measures. I would think such a ruling would open the door to repealing things like the DC gun ban, Chicago and New York’s heinous laws, and California’s and Massachusetts’ arbitrary laws regarding safety features.

That said, I’m sure some lawyers would be able to misconstrue it.

Got the newly repaired Walther P-22 to the range today and put about 250 rounds through it. Worked great. Kudos to Smith and Wesson for servicing it!

See, I’m not the only one who thinks Laurie Berkner is hot.

The Friday the 13th zombie edition of the Carnival of Cordite is up.

I mentioned that I had to send the Walther back to Smith and Wesson for repairs. I got it back today with a letter detailing the work they did (they replaced a spring and test fired it). They picked up the shipping, had it fixed and returned in less than two weeks. Now that is service! I applaud Smith and Wesson for taking good care of their customers.

And I’m happy to report they didn’t put a GPS tracking system in it.

Standard Mischief has some rules for blogging about laws:

OK, so I’d like to lay out some ground rules here. Whenever someone blogs about a law, a rule, regulation, a bill or an amendment, they should:

1.Cite the bill, (or whatever), number, AND the name of the bill, and,
2.Hyperlink to the text of the bill, and
3.Make a bona fide effort to count the approximate number of words in the bill, and,
4.(Optional) make fun of the excessive length of the bill/law/whatever.

Yeah, the are rather huge.

The Curious Relic is a blog that focuses on curios and relics.

CounterTop did his own gunsmithing. Soon, he’ll be ordering parts and gizmos and receivers. And one day he’ll realize he can build a complete gun just from parts laying around the garage.

In Mass, an idiot wants to put GPS or Lojack or some tracking technology into guns. Actually, the idiot sent a letter to Smith and Wesson and asked them to do that.

You’re asking yourself what the Hell is that? It’s a Fast Action Rifle that fires Nerf darts. Sweet. There’s video, pics and plans to make one. Must have. Via Justin.

You had me at Machine gun . . . no problem.

KDT spells out his views on which gun controls he finds appropriate:

Individual rights are always subject to infringement when the exercise thereof, taken to the extreme, may cause harm to the society at large. We are individuals, but we are also members of a society, and of a nation. When the collective welfare is threatened by an individual’s extreme exercise of their rights, the People have every reason to circumscribe that right.

I don’t know that I disagree with it.

Using this handy map making tool and info from Packing.org, I’ve created a map of states where folks with Tennessee Handgun Carry Permits can legally carry:

It appears we’re surrounded.

Map making link via Xrlq.

There are many reasons the City of Knoxville should go back to the drawing board with the proposed sale of the Candy Factory. There have been many problems with both process and participation.

The problems with process are many. First it is unknown how much money the City of Knoxville has spent maintaining and repairing the Candy Factory in the last twenty years. Much of the perceived need to sell the Candy Factory came from a report requested by the Public Building Authority of Knoxville back in November 2002.

The report was done by consulting firm John R. Wright. This report is very difficult to de-cipher because it depends on the subjective interpretation of City codes. In order to interpret the codes you would first need to know how the building would be used. The bottom line for repairs to the building was listed as 3.2 million dollars in the John R. Wright Conceptual report. The actual needed repairs may be less than 1 million dollars.

One problem is that there is no correlation to the page that lists the repair costs and the pages that describe the code problems. The key to the entire report is the heading “Conceptual”. This report means whatever you want it to mean. City Council should have required a new comprehensive study from a different firm before considering the sale of a valued public asset. This dated report was a poor foundation for City Council to make a decision with.

The second problem with process was a cost savings estimate requested by the City from the PBA. This cost savings estimate stated that the City would save ten million dollars over ten years if it sold the Candy Factory to Kinsey Probasco/Cardinal Construction. The math behind this estimate was tortured. It took the inflated and very subjective 3.2 million dollar repair cost from the 2002 John R. Wright report from the PBA and added to it ten years of annual operating costs of $200,000 per year. Then the PBA added the net present value of the proposed sales price of 1.8 million dollars. Somehow the PBA claimed this added up to ten million dollars. No accounting standard allows for the sale of an asset to be included in a cost savings estimate much less using the net present value of the sales price. This was a deception and misrepresentation.

The third problem with the process was the continued use of the deceptive cost savings estimate by Knoxville Mayor Bill Haslam and his Department of Policy Development Bill Lyons.

The fourth problem with process was how the Amphitheater was dropped from consideration even thought this was supposed to be a comprehensive World’s Fair Park proposal.

The fifth problem with process was when the Sunsphere was moved to another phase of the process. This has been touted as good management. What guarantee is there that the Sunsphere will be saved? What started as a comprehensive plan for the World’s Fair Park is now about selling the Candy Factory and the seven Victorian houses.

Kinsey Probasco still owes millions of dollars of investment from the Market Square project. Supposedly there were guarantees with the Market Square re-development plan also, but where are the condos for the Market Square garage? How can the City be confident the Sunsphere will be repaired and open to the public? Fool the public once, shame on you, fool the public twice and it is time for new representatives.

The first problem with participation was the only workshop in City Council where the public was allowed to explain to City Council the importance of the Candy Factory as a “public civic center” for all of Knoxville and Knox County. Bill Lyons countered that the Arts groups had been moved to the Emporium and everyone was happy. Citizens tried to explain that many non-arts groups relied on the Candy Factory and that a twenty year civic contract had been formed by the use of the building as a meeting place. Over 168 groups had used the Candy Factory in the six months between July ’04 and January ’05. Lyons countered again saying that all groups he had contacted had found new meeting spaces. When the vote was held in City Council it was a 6-3 approval.

The second problem with participation was the meeting at KCDC where only two commissioners and the new KCDC Vice-President were in attendance to listen to the viewpoints of the public. Since the Vice-President cannot vote only two voting commissioners were in attendance. Even though 13 people spoke Bill Lyons was quoted as saying, “We didn’t hear anything at the hearing that we haven’t heard before”. The next morning the KCDC board voted unanimously to approve the sale of the Candy Factory. You cannot hear if you do not listen. Has there been real public participation in this process?

The vote for the final part of the Worlds Fair Park project comes Tuesday January 17, when City Council votes on the Tax Increment Financing (TIF). While it has been touted that the City will receive 1.8 million dollars for the Candy Factory the truth is that the City and County will pay $600,000 to Kinsey Probasco/Cardinal Construction to take the Candy Factory off the City’s hands. The combined City and County TIF is 2.4 million dollars. The result is a net payout to take ownership of the building.

The major legal concern many people have over the proposed TIF is a “reduction” of the term “blighted”. People that live in the Parkridge and the Fourth and Gill area understand that any precedent which reduces the standard of the term “blighted” could affect their ability to keep their home if the City decides it is not maintained to the City’s liking. Some City defenders say this will not matter because the Candy Factory is a City asset. Don’t gamble your future on that premise. This is a serious issue. The Candy Factory is not blighted. How can City Council vote to approve the TIF if doing so means accepting a falsehood?

This was sold to the public as a comprehensive World’s Fair Park project. It is no longer comprehensive nor is it in the best interest of the people. City Council needs to show it will not be manipulated by dated reports and deceptive cost savings. City Council must not establish a dangerous precedent just to satisfy the political needs of a few people.

Jay is showing off some 1911s.

In a humor follow up, the joke I helped continue here has had its heritage researched here and here.

Chris highlights what is sure to be the next big test case for post-Kelo eminent domain proceedings:

Note here that from the description, it sounds like there may not be much actual “blight”. Instead, it seems “deteriorating” here actually means that a progressive number of households were simply swayed to sell-out to the developer.

It’s not actually blighted but it will be. Just like everything will someday be historic (unless you tear it down and rebuild regularly), eventually everything deteriorates. Seems like they may grease the wheels so that everything can be taken. For your own good, of course. And I’m not certain that it’s deteriorated just because some people have sold out.

Experts say for self-defense, nothing beats a gun:

This is one, hopefully, no one will have to observe. But January is (along with Quality of Life Month, Wealth Mentality Month, Be On-Purpose Month, and Get Organized Month) Self-Defense Awareness Month.

The event is sponsored by the National Self-Defense Institute to promote their SAFE (Self-Defense Awareness and Familiarization Exchange) program. The program has a two-fold purpose: To prevent crimes of sexual violence through programs of education and training, focusing primarily on awareness and prevention; and to educate women about realistic options that will help them avoid, escape, and survive assaults if they do occur.

Not much elaboration on why guns are best but I was unaware this was Self-Defense Awareness Month.

I’m placing the order this afternoon for the $10.99 9mm AR-15 mags. If you’re interested, let me know.

Thanks for the well wishes regarding the interview. They seemed to have worked. It went very well and I fully expect a call back from them. If all goes as planned, I can start buying guns again since I have a couple of projects on hold.

Seen at Alphie’s:

“I don’t think it’s appropriate or useful to look to foreign law in interpreting the provisions of our Constitution,” Judge Alito said in response to questions from Senator Tom Coburn, Republican of Oklahoma, in the third day of the judge’s confirmation hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

“I think the Framers would be stunned by the idea that the Bill of Rights is to be interpreted by taking a poll of the countries of the world,”

Ayup.

Egregious Charles on the annoying bill:

The thing is, 47 USC 223(h)(1)(B) excludes ‘interactive computer service’ as defined by 47 USC 230(f)(2), which pretty much seems to cover comments.

Basically it appears that it makes telephone harrassment cover VOIP.

And possibly email, depending on how TPTB interpret it.

Dirtcrashr has a handy list of gun blogs.

To Xrlq on another child, thought that’s a strange way to announce it.

I’ve covered Anthony Diotaiuto before. He’s a casualty in the war on drugs. In a pre-dawn raid, he took 10 rounds to the chest for less than one ounce of marijuana. Now, the police act as if they’ve got something to hide:

Attorney William Scherer III wrote in Tuesday’s lawsuit that the city of Sunrise illegally denied parts of the family’s first public records requests and ignored three subsequent requests. Attorneys for the family sought police department documents ranging from SWAT policies and training manuals to tactical notes and documents on the raid itself.

City attorneys responded that most of the items requested were not public because the information is part of a current investigation or it would reveal police secrets, according to the lawsuit.

City and police officials could not be reached for comment Wednesday.

Michele has more on the bill that bans annoyance on the internet (i.e., it doesn’t). She notes that the bill was taken out of context and that the version being quoted is an older (by two years) version of the bill. In short, the news source screwed the pooch and we bloggers ran with it.

I still disagree that the purpose of the language quoted was to deal with cyberstalking. I think it was to apply the same rules as standard phones to internet telephone. Of course, that may be what congress thinks cyberstalking is.

Additionally, she didn’t have a very happy SayUncle experience. She writes:

So what do you think happened when this itty bitty blogger tried to correct the record and point out the erroneous information? Well, lets just say I got some less than civil guests that wound up in my inbox, and I’ve spent close to an hour getting rid of them. Thank God for delete buttons. Unfortunately, contrary to their misguided belief, there’s not a darned thing I can do about that. Nope, according to the legislation their has to be at minimum, “substantial harassment”, at the maximum there has to be a level of consistent threat “to kill, injure, harass, or place under surveillance with intent to kill, injure, harass, or intimidate, or cause substantial emotional distress to a person in another State”.

Sorry you had a bad experience but odds are that the emails you got didn’t come from a reader here. See, the comments section here (as a favor to commenters) doesn’t display email addresses. I gave her page a quick glance (including searching the code for a mailto tag) and found no email contact info there. And commenters here, though direct and sometimes smarmy, are usually quite civil. That’s something I’m rather proud of, actually. I don’t think they’d send you nasty emails even if they had access to your email address, which they don’t. I doubt those emails were the result of a comment left here. As such, I find the accusation baseless.

That said, if any of you guys did send her nasty emails, that’s not nice.

Light blogging today. Interview and prepwork.

Now that’s gun porn. Heh.

Mr. Completely wants to have a gunblogger meetup in Reno on November 3 – 5. If interested, let him know. Readers are invited. Too far out to commit yet but I’d love to go.

Tam is showing the guts of her new 9mm AR-15 (which, by the way, is sweet – she let me hold it when I was last in the shop). I did the math on my pending 9mm project:

Upper $400
9mm Hammer $15
RRA Mag Block $120
Rear Sight $75
5 magazines $55
Total $665

Plus a lower, which I have. And, eventually, some sort of optic. Since it’s just going to be a range gun, I’ll probably slap a Tacpoint on it. We’ll call it $900. All that just to shoot indoors.

Update: Tam another pic here. Why the flurry of interest? I’m a trendsetter. No, I kid. Probably because it’s winter and we want to shoot EBRs indoors. Plus, you promised us matches at CCA.

Update 2: And a stock. Thinking M4 stock or an Ace Skeleton.

Jeff has the latest on anti-gun bias in the media.

Quote:

Feinstein questioned him on Congress’ power under the Commerce Clause, the same issue she pursued with Roberts. She asked him about his dissent in U.S. v. Rybar, in which Alito said Supreme Court precedent meant that a law barring possession of machine guns was unconstitutional because Congress had failed to delineate the source of its authority under the Commerce Clause or make “findings of fact” on how the Commerce Clause applies. Alito essentially repeated his dissent for Feinstein, declining to go any further.

“All that I was looking for was some evidence that the possession of a machine gun . . . had a substantial impact on interstate commerce. . . . That’s all the Supreme Court precedent [Lopez] required. That’s not a very heavy burden.”

Bob Krumm thinks so. He notes:

By a margin of about two-to-one, Republicans have disproportionately benefitted from Abramoff’s illegal largesse. That alone was enough to keep the scandal’s focus on Republicans. Not any more. Now, Dean has spotlighted the fact that Congessional Democrats are just as bad.

In my opinion, Dean has admitted that either the Republicans can be excused for their behavior because they received the money the same way the Democrats did. Or that the Democrats should go down too. Dean was trying to use a very deceitful tactic to deny allegations that lobbying money came to the Dems via Abramoff. By the way, here’s detail of money Abramoff funneled to politicos.

To avoid Katrina style confiscations of weapons, New Hampshire (life free or die!) has a bill in the works to make such confiscation illegal. Here’s the bill.

Bill Hobbs is calling it quits. I wish him the best and his blog will be missed.

A stitch in haste, addressing the hysteria of the law banning annoying people, notes:

–The word “annoy” appeared in the original VAWA; that is not the new language. Rather, the amendment extends the “annoy” element to the Internet as well as to the telephone. I do of course consider “annoy” to be an unconstitutionally vague term, but let’s acknowledge that its presence in the statute is not new. What is an “annoying” blog? Who knows. But then again, what is an “annoying” telephone call?

–The law applies, at most, to emails and not, contrary to all the panic, to web message boards and especially not to blogs. The statute requires a “transmission” — a website is not a “transmission” and is clearly not covered by the amendment. This is, at most, about anonymous e-mails that are intentionally sent (i.e., “transmitted”) to specific email addresses. I “send” (i.e., transmit) emails but I don’t “send” (i.e., transmit) my blog anywhere — readers seek it out.

Further, he states its intent is for internet phone calls. Sure, maybe the reaction from us libertarian types was alarmist, but in this case it should be.

The Brady Campaign notes:

Judge Samuel A. Alito’s judicial views pose serious dangers to the safety of our communities, our families, and our children, as evidenced by his troubling dissent in U.S. v. Rybar, 103 F.3d 273 (3rd Cir. 1996). For this reason, the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence announced its opposition to Judge Alito’s nomination to the United States Supreme Court last month. (It is the first time in its history that the Brady Center has opposed a Supreme Court nomination.)

In the Rybar case, Judge Alito concluded that the federal machine gun ban is an unconstitutional exercise of Congressional power under the Commerce Clause. Alito attempted to erect arbitrary hurdles to Congressional efforts to reduce the availability of machine guns to the criminal element. In unusually harsh language, the Rybar majority criticized Alito’s dissent as having “no authority” in the law and “run(ning) counter to the deference that the judiciary owes to its two coordinate branches of government….”

If Judge Alito’s view had prevailed, the federal ban on machine gun possession would have been struck down. Apart from the fact that Judge Alito’s position in Rybar was legally indefensible, it also is fair to ask: If Alito’s view had prevailed in the federal courts, what would have been the real world consequences for the American people?

Arbitrary hurdles like the commerce clause? Morons. They then list a bunch of cases where machine guns were used in crime. Don’t they know shooting people is illegal. And the guns in those cases were illegal as well. Too bad the Bradies spent so much time obfuscating supposed assault weapons and machine guns.

DiFi also plans on addressing it in the hearings:

A gun-control activist and author of the now-expired ban on assault weapons, Feinstein singled out a case in which Alito argued in a 3rd Circuit dissent that a federal ban on machine guns was unconstitutional. Feinstein said she is concerned that that opinion “demonstrates a willingness to strike down laws with which you personally may disagree by employing a narrow reading of Congress’ constitutional authority to enact legislation.”

Narrow reading? That’s quite laughable since congress has widened the commerce clause to encapsulate everything.

AR-15 20 rounders for $7.99! Thirty rounders here for $9.99 if you buy ten or more.

Toon Disney is running my favorite cartoon of all time. Thank you, TiVo. First episode I’ve seen in years and it brings the funny. I love the lines. Whoever did the voice of The Tick should get an award. He’s funny. A taste:

Every citadel of justice should have its spans as spic as we do.

Arthur, monkey outta nowhere!

Who can tell where dirty will strike next?

Don’t move, Arthur. It’s got a timer. It must be some kind of monkey bomb.

Beautiful.

Kevin thinks so. I respect Feingold for being the lone senator to vote no for the PATRIOT Act. On guns, he voted for the assault weapons ban in 1994 and against it in 2004. He also said:

The Second Amendment raises interesting questions about a constitutional interpretation. I read the Second Amendment as providing an individual right to keep and bear arms as opposed to only a collective right. Individual Americans have a constitutional right to own and use guns. And there are a number of actions that legislatures should not take in my view to restrict gun ownership.

Unless he says he supports the AWB again to win the presidency, he may be the most pro-gun of potential presidential candidates. However, the McCain Feingold Incumbent Protection err Campaign Finance Reform law is a huge black mark for the man.

I’ve talked about Laurie Berkner’s hotness but she really needs a new shirt. Always with the blue one.

Via Reader CarlS, comes this letter to The Tennessean:

I’m not sure why Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi and other prominent liberal Democrats haven’t proposed this, but all we really need to do to solve all the problems with violence in Iraq is to have the new government over there pass the equivalent of the “Brady Bill.”

I’m convinced that once car bombs and large knives are banned in Iraq, the violence will stop. I mean, hey, it’s worked like a charm over here; why not Iraq?

Heh.

Seen at Jeff’s:

And, according to Iranians I trust, Osama bin Laden finally departed this world in mid-December. The al Qaeda leader died of kidney failure and was buried in Iran, where he had spent most of his time since the destruction of al Qaeda in Afghanistan. The Iranians who reported this note that this year’s message in conjunction with the Muslim Haj came from his number two, Ayman al-Zawahiri, for the first time.

I’ve suspected he was dead for a while. Obviously, this is not confirmation.

From the Department of Duh:

Americans remain strongly committed to protecting private property from the possibility of unjust seizure, according to the results of a nationwide survey released today by the American Farm Bureau Federation during the organization’s annual convention.

The poll shows, regardless of geographical, partisan and other demographic differences, Americans are unified nearly 2-to-1 against government use of eminent domain to take private property, except in limited circumstances such as when the public at large would clearly benefit from a new road, electric utility or similar project.

Likewise, 83 percent of Americans oppose the use of eminent domain to further private development initiatives. Seizure for private development was the issue at the heart of the Kelo v. New London, Conn., case decided by the U.S. Supreme Court last year. That case made national headlines when the high court ruled that property could be taken from one landowner to advance the economic development efforts of another private entity.

It’s a good thing so many oppose it. Maybe politicos and talking heads will pay attention.

Yahoo! does a photo spread from the porn awards. Pics are safe for work, it is Yahoo! ya know.

It is now against the law to post a anonymous comment on a blog if it “annoys” another party.

I am not kidding you. This is the ultimate Christmas gift to politicians.

“Whoever…utilizes any device or software that can be used to originate telecommunications or other types of communications that are transmitted, in whole or in part, by the Internet… without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person…who receives the communications…shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.”

President Bush signed this into law on January 5th 2006 when he signed the H.R. 3402, the “Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act of 2005″.

Declan McCullagh at cnet news.com writes:

“The use of the word ‘annoy’ is particularly problematic,” says Marv Johnson, legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union. “What’s annoying to one person may not be annoying to someone else.”

Buried deep in the new law is Sec. 113, an innocuously titled bit called “Preventing Cyberstalking.” It rewrites existing telephone harassment law to prohibit anyone from using the Internet “without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy.”

To grease the rails for this idea, Sen. Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, and the section’s other sponsors slipped it into an unrelated, must-pass bill to fund the Department of Justice. The plan: to make it politically infeasible for politicians to oppose the measure.

The tactic worked. The bill cleared the House of Representatives by voice vote, and the Senate unanimously approved it Dec. 16.

There’s an interesting side note. An earlier version that the House approved in September had radically different wording. It was reasonable by comparison, and criminalized only using an “interactive computer service” to cause someone “substantial emotional harm.”

That kind of prohibition might make sense. But why should merely annoying someone be illegal?

There are perfectly legitimate reasons to set up a Web site or write something incendiary without telling everyone exactly who you are.

Think about it: A woman fired by a manager who demanded sexual favors wants to blog about it without divulging her full name. An aspiring pundit hopes to set up the next Suck.com. A frustrated citizen wants to send e-mail describing corruption in local government without worrying about reprisals.