What do you think of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution?
We were just wondering, with the NRA in town and all.
What d’ya think?
Here it is …
Amendment II
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
We conservative sorts tend to like to allow the states to handle things as opposed to the feds but that pipe dream died long ago. Another issue is states v. cities:
Some new changes being considered at the statehouse would call for statewide gun laws only, and no city gun laws.
[...]
The sponsor of the bill, Rep. Jim Aslanides of Coshocton, said that if gun laws are made only at the state level, gun owners will be better able to be aware of them and comply.
“Because you have a modge-podge of different ordinances that vary from place to place, it becomes confusing and almost impossible to adhere to,” Aslanides said.
The much-debated Columbus assault weapons ban would no longer apply if the state legislation
While I’d be happy with the result (i.e., no lame ban on weapons that look like assault weapons), it takes the authority from the locals which sets my little l libertarian feelers into a bit of tizzy. Thoughts?
I’m not blogging much today (you know, stuff) but there’s a lot of gun blogging happening at The Gun Blogs. Like an excellent pictorial review of SKS and some sights (along with resources) and Blackfork on high power competition.
Rustmeister fisks the bit I mentioned here where bed-wetter Fern Siegel proves he’s ignorant, hysterical or about as smart as a box of rocks.
Congrats to a visitor from the Anglo Irish Bank in the UK for being visitor #1,000,000 to saysuncle.com (referred by Gun Law News). S/He either liked or hated what they saw as they were here for about 11 minutes.
From the CNN Transcript, Nancy holds forth an illegal weapon to make a point:
GRACE: You know, it`s amazing to me — with us, Chief Inspector Joseph Fox with the Philadelphia PD. Sir, it`s an honor to have you on. It`s amazing to me a freak like this killer can walk the streets, double- fisted, sawed-off shotgun which owning one, having one in your possession – - this is a sawed-off shotgun from a case I prosecuted a long, long time ago. A sawed-off shotgun can easily be concealed up your sleeve, inside a coat, down a workout jacket, like this guy had on. Having it alone is a crime.
Then why do you have it? Ms. Grace, do you happen to have a tax stamp for that weapon? If not, you’re a lawbreaker if you own it or possess it. Granted, holding it temporarily does not necessarily constitute possession but, given most departments have a policy of destroying crime weapons, how did you get it? I know of no exemption in the law for media types. Who owns that weapon?
Not much activity over at The Gun Blogs lately (other than me). Why is that? I thought you guys would dig it (and you said you would in a poll) and that non-bloggers would like a place to blog.
Was it something I said?
New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s lawsuit against 15 alleged “rogue” firearms dealers in five states is political grandstanding run amok.
The press and prosecutors in those five states ought to be asking Bloomberg why, if his investigators had positively identified these retailers and caught them in an illegal act, was the information not turned over to the proper authorities, including the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives?
Instead, the headline-hunting Bloomberg launched a civil lawsuit in what should be, if he is to be believed, a criminal action.
There’s a reason for that. The private investigators New York hired to conduct this sting must have made deliberately false statements on federal firearms purchase forms. That’s a felony. They should be prosecuted. If Bloomberg sent them to do this, he’s an accessory, if not a conspirator.
He is correct. It is also an admission that NY’s gun control laws aren’t all they’re cracked up to be.
This just in: Pictures of guns are dangerous as is gun-themed interior decor. And by dangerous, I mean merely cause fits in hoplophobic bed-wetters.
The NRA is getting tough with law enforcement officials. Politically, this may be a bad move for them but it’s a good idea for rallying the base.
Defense Review has the skinny on the BHI SOPMOD AK. It’s the AK that wants to be an AR.
Ayup:
California State Attorney General Bill Lockyer seems to have clued in to the fact that Americans don’t want to ban the private possession of firearms. Unfortunately, instead of being persuaded to find alternate subjects over which to harass the people of his state, he’s turned sneaky. Now, instead of pushing overt bans, he’s touting a trio of bills that would use bureaucracy and petty regulation as vehicles for choking off the sale of firearms.
Read the bill summary, they’re a hoot.
I’m going to go ahead and call Bloomberg’s latest (you can past coverage here) antics of sending private investigators to investigate gun shops in other states for the purpose of suing them a victory for gun rights. Why, you may ask? Simple. It essentially shows that NY’s stringent and draconian gun laws are not having the desired affect. Since folks are unwilling to deal with the real issues after their ideas fail, they must have a scapegoat. In this case, that scapegoat is SC, GA, VA, etc. The facts are that NY has some of the most stringent/draconian gun laws in the country (in third place, with DC first and Chicago second) but they still have a significant number of gun crimes. Since they passed the laws, there must be some reason those aren’t working and it must be due to the failue of other states. Otherwise, they’d have to admit their laws are not an effective means to their end.
Today, Junior learned two valuable lessons. Lesson 1: Don’t stick your fingers in the automatic bubble making machine. Lesson 2: Don’t eat sand.
The not so valuable lesson she learned is that, when it rains, the dog poops closer to the back porch.
Or (in my best The Tick voice) the righteous ass-pounding of justice is kinda icky:
I’m sorry, but those who wring their hands over state executions, while laughing at the idea that prison gang bangs are a convict’s just reward, lose their right to claim human rights as a motivating force for their objection to the death penalty.
Amen. Now, it’s no secret I oppose the death penalty but not for that hippie tree-hugging most folks do. I oppose it because it is disproportionately applied to minorities (specifically the poor). So, my opposition is not due some human rights claim.
Police, it seems, are killing more and more family pets. Radley details a couple of incidents. One that rather frightened me:
The three officers chasing a suspect “acted in reckless and callous disregard for the constitutional rights” of Cynthia Peters and Mark Parr when they shot the couple’s 1 ½-year-old pit bull Blu on July 27, 2005, according to the suit filed Thursday in U.S. District Court in San Francisco.
Blu was in the couple’s fenced yard on Sixth Street when the officers opened the gate to pursue a suspect, then shot the dog 11 times with pistols and a shotgun. When Parr ran up and asked the officers, “Why’d you shoot my dog?” police “pointed their guns at him, kicked and punched him and threw him to the ground,” the suit said.
Seriously? That is beyond reason to willfully shoot a family pet with such fanatical zeal. Then to threaten the family? That is inexcusable. I’d have put 11 rounds in someone myself.
Eight parents in Knoxville have had warrants issued for their arrest because their kids missed some school. Gimme a damn break.
I have to confess that I’ve never had much use nor a desire to get into surplus rifles. But Tam does and she tells us why. They are indeed historical and neat but I’m just an Evil Black Rifle guy at heart.
I just heard from a friend who had a frightening story to tell. Turns out he has a friend who works for the NSA. Apparently, the NSA has been getting the records of gun buyers from the FBI. I guess the program works like this…
Person enters gun shop,
Person files background check paperwork,
Gunshop sends background check info to government,
[snip]
So when the goverment gets the info, they have the phone number and other personal information and they do the background check.
All this information is sent to the NSA to be added to the database with phone records and other information you provided for the background check.
This program will allow the NSA to identify potential terrorists and to know what type of weapons they may have purchased through legal channels. Ultimately it doesn’t matter if they use an alias because the NSA tracks phone numbers and addresses to find the terrorist patterns.
It comes from Kos so take with a huge grain of salt. Let me say unequivocally that this not any sort of confirmation nor proof of any such activity and I see no convincing evidence that this is taking place. But I’ll also say that this sort of activity would not surprise me in the least if it did happen.
I told you a while back the gun control push was upon us again. I was right. Peruse these headlines if you want proof. With some steam from the mayor of NY, that time is upon us. So, be ready and prepared. Start pestering your congressmen now.
Here’s a particularly hysterical example:
The NY Post on Bloomberg’s suit:
SUE THE BASTARDS
Nice. more:
The easy availability of illegal guns on the streets of America’s big cities is a scandal of long standing, and Mayor Bloomberg’s continuing efforts to do something about them are to be applauded.
Yesterday, Hizzoner announced an interesting escalation of that initiative – city-backed lawsuits against 15 gun dealers in five states. The mayor alleges that these sellers are a significant source of high-quality weaponry taken all too regularly from punks arrested in New York.
Whether the city has standing to pursue such litigation is unclear and, in any event, it will be years before the suits bear fruit. If they ever do.
That’s not the point. [actually, it is a very important point - ed]
The fact is that something must be done about illegal guns – emphasis on illegal – and right now the only action on that front is in City Hall.
Media representatives are invited to join a discussion of the problem of illegally trafficked handguns with a panel of experts from the media, law enforcement, and advocacy groups to focus on the question, “Where did the gun come from?” Since five out of six guns recovered in crime were bought illegally, it’s vital to find ways to intercept the thriving illegal gun business.
Media, advocacy groups and law enforcement are experts? What about a federally licensed gun dealer? Or, say, an NRA legal rep. And are you guys finally admitting that it’s not gun shows and lawful gun dealers that put crime guns out there but it is those that purchase guns illegally?
Legally Owned Guns Do Far More Good than Harm
Bullets vs. Bull manure, part two
Guns: The best health insurance
[snip]
Legally Owned Guns Do Far More Good than Harm
Bullets vs. Bull manure, part two
Guns: The best health insurance
In the last Dose, I posited that earlier in American history, a Winchester rifle was the most potent health insurance (it was the only kind, really) most people could get. I also alluded to how this might still be the case today…
Seriously, folks – despite all the mainstream’s trumped-up claims about the dangers of firearms (the one about a gun in the home being more likely to harm the homeowner than a criminal cracks me up), the real statistics firmly cement the fact that legally owned and carried guns do far, far more good than harm.
Cases in point, from public records: In U.S. states that DON’T ALLOW law-abiding citizens to pack heat without restriction…
There are 89% more violent crimes than in states that allow “concealed carry” (that’s gun-speak for being legal to carry a hidden firearm on your person)
There are 127% more murders than in states that allow concealed carry
There are 25% more rapes than in states that allow concealed carry
There are 96% more aggravated assaults than in states that allow concealed carry
There are 106% more robberies than in states that allow concealed carry.[snip]
In the seven-year period following the adoption of such laws, U.S. states that allowed unrestricted (or virtually so) concealed-carrying of handguns enjoyed an average:
27% reduction in violent crime
31% reduction in murders
16% reduction in robberies
26% reduction in aggravated assault
8% reduction in rapes
There’s more but try telling that to the AMA. Now, I know that correlation is not causation but it does show that CCW laws and access to guns don’t cause an increase in crime.
Not feeling it today. Later, kids.
While pregnant, the Mrs. wasn’t drinking (of course). But she did have a hankering for the refreshing taste of an ice cold beer on occassion. So, she’d been sipping on O’Doul’s non-alcoholic brew. Well, she’d been giving a sip or two to Junior now and then since it wasn’t alcoholic and Junior asked for it and seemed to like it. Well, being no longer pregnant, I bought her some real beer. Junior walked up and made a motion for it and, out of reflex, the Mrs. hands her the bottle and Junior takes two big gulps. That’s when the Mrs. says aloud Oh crap realizing she just gave Junior a real beer. Oops.
Some stats on officer deaths in 2005:
Fifty police officers were shot to death in the United States last year, among 122 who were killed in the line of duty.
FBI: 122 Police Officers Killed in 2005
Mon May 15, 12:28 PM ET
WASHINGTON – Fifty police officers were shot to death in the United States last year, among 122 who were killed in the line of duty.
In all, 55 officers were killed intentionally, two fewer than in 2004, according to preliminary
FBI statistics released Monday. Vehicles were used in five deaths, the bureau said.At the time they were killed, 34 officers were wearing body armor. But the FBI did not say whether bullets penetrated the armor in any of those deaths. Handguns were used to kill 42 officers, while five were shot with shotguns and three with a rifle. Six officers were killed with their own weapons, the FBI said.
The bureau said that authorities solved all the killings.
Twenty eight officers were killed in the South, 10 in the Midwest, 10 in the West, and five in the Northeast, the FBI said. Two officers were killed in Puerto Rico.
There were 67 accidential deaths of officers in 2005, 15 fewer than a year earlier, the FBI said. There was no description of how those deaths occurred.
The preliminary numbers come from information submitted by more than 10,000 state, local and tribal law enforcement agencies. The FBI publishes final numbers in the fall.
What do you do when a person who was a police officer threatens you? Well, this guy drew down:
A Mt. Pleasant Township man is fighting to regain his right to carry a concealed weapon after police charged him with drawing a handgun in a public area and threatening to kill a former state trooper.
Court records say David J. Warburton Jr., 49, had his firearms permit revoked in April. Police say Warburton unholstered a Browning .380-caliber pistol during a confrontation with David S. Flagg, 45, on Dec. 4 inside the East Huntingdon Township Wal-Mart.
Westmoreland County Sheriff Chris Scherer said he decided to take Warburton’s permit away after he learned state police charged Warburton with recklessly endangering another person, terroristic threats, simple assault and harassment. Warburton’s lawyer, Jeffrey Abramowitz, said his client did not point the gun at anyone and drew it only because he felt threatened by Flagg. Abramowitz appealed Scherer’s decision last week.
“He had no intention of discharging the weapon. He had no desire to do anything but ensure his own safety,” Abramowitz said.
Err, never draw a weapon unless you intend to use it. It’s not just good policy, it’s usually the law. As to why the fuss:
“Absolutely, I felt threatened,” Flagg said. “He asked me twice, in succession, did I want to die tonight.”
Seems the idiots at the Gun Guys are posting the NRA’s tax returns (which are public for anyone who asks, btw) and yammering about salaries. Well, David thinks that if it’s good for the goose . . .
An interesting ruling out of Cali:
The California Supreme Court ruled Monday that a person can’t be convicted of the crime of possessing a sawed-off rifle unless prosecutors can prove that the defendant knew the weapon was unusually short.
The court upheld the conviction of Sean King of San Francisco for possessing a short-barreled rifle in 2001.
Police found the loaded rifle in the drawer of a workbench in the garage of a house shared by King, his mother and his brother.
The stock of the rifle had been sawed off so that the weapon measured 24 and 1/8 inches. The state’s Dangerous Weapons Control Law makes it a crime to possess a rifle less than 26 inches long.
Not sure how similar Cali’s laws are to the federal laws (not sure what the overall length is for federal rules but think 26 sounds right) but it seems odd.
First Qwest, now Bellsouth says they didn’t do it:
BellSouth says it has no evidence it was contacted by a U.S. spy agency or gave the government access to any of its customers’ phone call records, disputing a published report that sparked a national debate on federal surveillance tactics.
The regional Bell, which offers telecommunication services in nine Southeastern states, said Monday it had conducted a “thorough review” and established that it had not given the National Security Agency customer call records.
A report Thursday by USA Today identified BellSouth Corp., along with AT&T Inc. and Verizon Communications Inc., as companies that had complied with an NSA request for tens of millions of customer phone records after the 2001 terror attacks. Experts said the agency was likely seeking to detect calling patterns in the mountain of data.
“Based on our review to date, we have confirmed no such contract exists and we have not provided bulk customer calling records to the NSA,” the company said in a statement.
As for Verizon:
Verizon spokesman Bob Varettoni referred to a company statement Friday that said Verizon doesn’t “provide any government agency unfettered access to our customer records or provide information to the government under circumstances that would allow a fishing expedition.”
Increasingly, it looks like someone went and got me all worked up for nothing.
The Bloomberg administration’s unusual move appears to circumvent the law signed by President Bush last year that gives gun makers and dealers broad protection from civil suits, except in cases where they violate the law.
Actually, it doesn’t if the dealers involved knowingly sold weapons to straw purchasers. Otherwise, there really is no negligence on their part. But it looks like they did, according to this report:
For the sting operation, the city singled out about 45 dealers based on gun trace data that links weapons sold in those shops to hundreds of shootings and other crimes in New York City from 1994 to 2001.
Private investigators wore hidden cameras and attempted “straw purchases,” where one person fills out the legal forms and makes the purchase for someone else. The scam, prohibited by federal law, is typically used by people who cannot own firearms, such as convicted felons.
The city said the undercover investigators entered stores in teams of two, usually a man and a woman. While the woman roamed the store and acted disinterested, the man made all the inquiries about the gun and made it clear he was the buyer. When it came time to make the purchase, the woman would step up to fill out the paperwork.
The majority of dealers refused the sale, Bloomberg said. In a video from one such attempt, the man behind the counter shrugged his shoulders, apologized and said it would be against the law for him to sell to the woman because she was clearly not the intended user.
But the 15 dealers named in the suit allowed the transaction, and Bloomberg called them “the worst of the worst.”
“They were either intentionally or negligently selling handguns in a manner that violates federal law,” he said.
Of course, the city of New York running sting operations out of its jurisdiction is a bit troubling.
Also, it rather depends on if the man was in fact a prohibited person. If he is, the investigators broke the law.
Update: No real details but the shops in Georgia are denying selling guns illegally:
Earl Driggers, the owner of A-1 Jewelry and Pawn, said his store has cooperated with authorities in a sting operation in the past, but was not a target of the probe. He believes he has always complied with the law. He said that once someone passes a background check and is sold a gun, it’s impossible for gun stores to control who the buyer gives that gun to.
“We certainly do everything we can to make sure guns don’t leave our store illegally,” Driggers said. “I don’t know what you’re supposed to do. If a guy comes in and meets all the criteria and you comply with the law, I don’t know what you do.”
His son, Greg Driggers, is owner of AAA Pawnbrokers. The younger Driggers said he, too, was baffled why his store was named in the lawsuit.
“We’re not selling guns illegally,” the younger Driggers said. He added, “If they wound up in the hands of criminals, that’s because people are doing things illegal, but it’s not on the part of us. At any time, anybody, any authority is welcome to come in and check my records.”
Majority (54%) Feel Current Gun Registry Should Be Scrapped And Most (56%) Blame Liberal Politicians, Not Bureaucrats (37%), For Bungling
But:
But Majority Of Canadians (67%) Also Support Idea Of Having Some Type Of Gun Registry Put In Place By Harper Government
Alrighty then.
The city is suing 15 out-of-state gun shops it says supply a significant portion of the guns that flow into New York, including some that end up in the hands of criminals.
The lawsuit being filed Monday asks the federal court to order supervision and extra training for the dealers in Georgia, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina and Virginia. It also seeks some damages and compensation.
“By and large, most gun dealers respect and follow the law, but the small group of dealers that do not should be held accountable,” Mayor Michael Bloomberg said in a statement.
The city’s law department singled out the 15 gun shops after hiring private investigators who fanned out to dealers in the five states over the past several weeks.
Wearing hidden cameras, the investigators entered stores in teams of two and attempted “straw purchases,” in which the buyer completes the paperwork and passes the background check, but later hands over the weapon to someone else who is not allowed to own a firearm.
The scam, prohibited by federal law, is typically used by people who are under 21 or convicted felons. The 15 dealers named in the suit sold guns to the undercover investigators. The city said the sales were refused at about 30 other shops.
So, the investigators broke the law? I wonder if the owners of the shop knew that was the case? It makes a big difference in terms of legality.
Perusing the blogs, I found this post at Mr. Completely’s. Then I say to myself: Self, why do I recognize that gun. And Self responds with Dude, because it’s yours . . . well, before you got all Tactical Tommy with it.
The Million Mom March merged with the Brady Bunch a while back. I always wondered why. Via David Hardy, now I do:
We can only speculate on why the Million Mom March Foundation felt that it had to liquidate itself and transfer its assets to the Brady Center but the information and that at Link (”problems” with the group’s tax return for 2000) suggest that, had it not done so, its 501(c)(3) exemption would have been revoked by the Internal Revenue Service because of widespread evidence of abuse of that status.
Tax problems? Well, since they think 5 = one million, I’m not surprised.
First, Kevin Drum says the powers that be were likely aware that this wasn’t a slam dunk:
Gee, Pete, you seem awfully sure that this program “fully complies with the law and the Constitution.” So why is it that when Qwest asked for a routine court order to make everything legal and tidy, the NSA decided it would rather leave a gap in its surveillance than get one? According to USA Today, their lawyers told Qwest “they didn’t want to do that because FISA might not agree with them.”
And Pattycakes, via Xrlq, says the following (I’ve added notes to for your convenience):
Next thing you know, the government will require me to tell it: what I do for a living; exactly how much I make1&2; where I live1; what stocks I buy and sell2&3, and for how much2; what I pay in property taxes2; and how much profit I make on my investments2&3.
1 – The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct.
2 – The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
3 – Powers of Congress . . . To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
I was looking looking for that section that said the .gov had the power to compile massive amounts of data on its citizens unrelated to commerce, a census, and a tax but I cannot. So, help me out here.
Jeff notes the common them among gun controllers is an attempt to Stop Crime By Punishing the Law Abiding. Of course, all this schemes do is punish the law abiding and have no effect on stopping crime.
At some point in the next few days, this blog will hit 1,000,000 visitors (per sitemeter, anyhoo – we’re well passed that on my other stat package but no one sees it). So, go me.
Or at least your words maybe showing up there? Head on over to AC’s place. Sayeth the AC:
Howz about you? Does the border need troops? Does supplementing the Border Patrol with Guardsmen even amount to militarization? What do you think of Bush’s plan as you understand it?
Make sure and spellcheck and otherwise prettify your comments because they may very well be selected for broadcast on THE NEWS this afternoon.
Your comments could appear on the TeeVee.
Not much here today but there’s some good stuff at The Gun Blogs. My favorite:
In thinking about statistics and how they are used by every gun control advocate from Sarah Brady to Michael Bloomberg,it occurred to me that perhaps we should use some of our own. Admittedly this idea will be much more effective when you are talking to that sister or neighbor or uncle or talkative stranger in the taxicab than it would be to a large audience. Someone with whom you have established a rapport that predisposes them to at least listen, and maybe with a tendency to trust what you say.
Americans Brace for AK-47s Now in Streets
It is one of the most feared weapons that have largely been inaccessible for decades. That has changed recently, as law enforcement authorities in Palm Beach and Martin counties documented deadly incidents involving the new weapon of choice by gangs. In both counties, AK-47s were used to kill two people and wound four others in three separate incidents.
[snip]
The weapon is believed to be a badge of honour for organized youth gangs. AK-47s still are less readily available than the more traditional weapons used by gangs, but they appear to be the next phase of evolutionary drug turf battles. The illegal drug trade is a multi-billion dollar industry, with most of its acquired revenue secured by mid and upper levels of its hierarchy. The lower rungs of the organizational structure is where gang members are younger, more brazen, much more likely to take aggressive risks and more violent.
New AK-47s have been banned in the US since 1986. The import of the semi-automatic versions has been heavily regulated since the 1990s due to sporting purpose import restrictions. Yet, I’ve never known of a shortage of the semi-auto versions due to manufacturers making models to comply with import restrictions. The facts are that the gang members using these guns are doing so illegally. Not sure what the point of the story is regarding why they think they were inaccessible and are now suddenly flooding the streets. And the Canadians look at the second amendment:
Although guns have become a more imposing problem in large metropolitan Canadian cities, they are much more prevalent in the United States. The history of the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment was constructed and serves the means “…necessary to the security of a free State…” With this in mind, the Second Amendment was issued for the militias of the free states, whose ample supply of able-bodied, part-time members, to be armed with their own weapons. The idea was for the states to have the freedom to defend themselves against enemies foreign and domestic.
Close. I am amazed that when someone covers the second amendment, they tell you all about it and what it says but rarely quote the damn thing.
Update: And what the Hell is that rifle in the picture. It is not an AK that I have ever seen.
Update 2: Per a commenter at KABA:
The picture in the article is not even a real firearm. It is a paint ball gun dressed up as an AK. You can see the valve for the CO2 bottle on the bottom of the pistol grip.
Junior’s taking to her little brother quite well. Mommy and daddy’s little helper:
So, my little snippet about the phone records set off some nerves in comments. Not sure why readers would consider my response to it a surprise. Heck, I’ve even got folks threatening to not read me. Why do I oppose such a measure? Simple. It’s none of the .gov’s business who everyone calls. Period. It’s also unreasonable to maintain such data on anyone who is not suspected of a crime, much less on everyone. And it just wreaks of big brother nannyism. It’s just one of those things I oppose.
Chris details why this stuff is legal (but legal and constitutional aren’t the same):
These records are legally semi-public information, not private. It is legal to collect these records without a warrant, so long as they are not used to SPECIFICALLY TARGET an individual without a warrant (there is a specific pen register warrant for that purpose), or used beyond basic identifying characteristics. Once a trace of interest is found, a warrant can then be applied for for further surveliance.
Does that mean I can call up the phone company and tell them I want all their data from forever? No. It means the .gov can and nothing more. He also writes:
Under the third party exemption, if a third party is allowed to setup or witness what is otherwise a private communication between two parties, the expectation of privacy of the existence of the communication is breached (if it existed at all which in many cases it does not), and the existence and external characteristics of that communication can then be compelled and used as evidence without a warrant.
So, there’s the why they can do it. Also, given that this info was made public months ago and is now resurfacing in light of a new CIA appointee, I find the story to be politically expedient. But what surprised me most was the defense (or passing blame) of the .gov on this issue (such as Blaming Clinton: I don’t care if the guys maintaining databases on me have Ds or Rs after their names. I’m pissed because I’m in their database). The one that takes the cake for the stink of big .gov defense is this from one of my favorite bloggers Kim du Toit. Essentially, he tells us not to worry for a variety of reasons. A sum of those reasons and my responses to them are as follows:
The NSA is collecting only a couple of pieces of information: So? That’s like saying you’ll only stick it in a little bit.
The info isn’t really a privacy violation because it’s just numbers called from and to: So, why do they need to know that I call my mom? They don’t. Period.
If you don’t collect all the data, you can’t narrow the search at all: Or you could just investigate those suspected of terrorists activities and crimes. You know, police work. After all, if you don’t collect all the data on who buys guns . . .
You’re not that interesting: I find this one the most difficult to not laugh about. It doesn’t take much for them to become interested. After all, I’m an otherwise non-interesting person yet I had agents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives show up at my house and quote my website to me. But, hey, you got nothing to worry about.
And my personal fave of evoking 9/11: Trouble is, this was going on prior to 9/11. Didn’t help much, did it?
It’s another step toward the nanny state and I don’t like it. May not be that big of a deal in terms of violations of privacy but it is significant. Another canary just died.
Update: Glad I’m not the only one. Seems Jeff and Tam concur.
Michael is recovering and has his work cut out for him. He can do it and I wish him the best.
PGP takes them to task over it. It’s amusing how they still think the ban actually banned anything.
When Artie was four, five years old I’d try to get him to play with dolls. He’d play with them, sure, just not the way I meant. He’d take the biggest one, make it into a gun, and blast away at the others!”
Well, here’s hoping.
Welcome Indian Cowboy to the gun blog community. He has a nice bit (complete with pictures) about the NAA Black Widow and other NAA weapons. Read it here.
Looks like the .gov is compiling phone records on a colossal scale. Dude, this crap has to stop.
And it looks like things are going well at the Gun Blogs, so head over there for your gun blog fix.
The Second Child is considerably larger than Junior was. He’s pretty big. Whats’ more is he’s rather large and was 11 days early. He has all his fingers and toes and is in good health. Mom’s doing OK as well. He’s a very content baby.
Now, I knew that certain things would be filled with fluid when he was born but I didn’t realize exactly how large his, err, package would be (I’m sure his boys account for more than the three ounces). Good thing the swelling will go down because it’d be difficult to go through life with your dudes knocking your knees.
Any way, we’re doing well. Thanks for the comments and emails. I’m heading back to the hospital. More later (like tomorrow later).
PGP continues his fight against the anti-gun loons at Kos. Seems to be a lot lefties championing gun rights these days. I wonder if gun activism is consistent with which party is in or out of power?
Over at The Gun Blogs, Nylarhotep brings our attention to more shady ATF goings on:
The U.S. District Attorney’s Office in Cheyenne is reviewing a lawsuit filed Monday against the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives by the state of Wyoming.
“We need to evaluate what the case is and what we’re going to do with it,” said spokesman John Powell.
The lawsuit essentially centers on who has the authority to restore gun rights to people convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence offenses. But a bigger issue could be the BATF’s threat to deem Wyoming-issued concealed weapon permits invalid at federally licensed firearms dealers.
Oleg has a pic of a nice looking Ultimak and a nice looking lady. BTW, I highly recommend Ultimak products for your AK mounting system needs.
Via Nathan, I have met the retard queen, err, gender non-specific term to denote a ruler of people because such gender-specific language is sexist, you misogynistic rethuglican. Get out of my uterus.
Update: Sorry about that, off my meds.
The Mrs. will be induced tomorrow morning and our son should arrive later later in the day. So, blogging will be, err, light.
Kinda funny the difference from the first kid to the next. With the first one, you run out and spend tons of money on books, gizmos, strollers, bottles, and doodads; then you dedicate yourself to learning about babies; then you childproof the house; then you build a nursery; then you get some affairs in order; then you stock up on diapers; then the wife has baby showers; then all your friends are gaga and congratulatory; etc., etc. With the second one, you just put a post-it note on the fridge that says baby thursday.
WFAA headline:
61-year-old vigilante speaks out
From the article:
Police released the mug shots of four suspects after authorities said they attempted an armed robbery on a 61-year-old man who turned vigilante.
Three of the suspects were put in jail and the fourth was hospitalized with a gunshot wound he received after Ken said he fought back.
A person who defends themselves is not a vigilante.
Update: Well that was fast, they changed it to armed robbery victim.
Not much of that here today. But there’s quite a bit here, including me with some practical advice on avoiding unneccessary litigation in case of a defensive gun use.
In a post called bullying, I noted that kids today aren’t treated like kids were treated in my day. Here are couple more examples of how folks treat kids today and why it’s, well, stupid. Firsts up is this AP story:
A high school student was suspended for five days after singing a spoof of “On Top of Ol’ Smokey” that includes lyrics about shooting a teacher.
Beth Ann Cox, 16, a junior at Peachtree Ridge High School, said she had been humming the song during German class but denied singing loudly or directing the lyrics at her teacher, Phil Carroll.
OMG! Cue hysteria. Gangsta rap? Death Metal? Nope:
The song includes the lyrics: “On top of Ol’ Smokey, all covered with blood, I shot my poor teacher with a .44 slug.”
When I was a pup, I recall singing that very song with other kids. We were told to knock it off if we were being disruptive but no one ever got suspended for it. Oh, and when we sang it, we were 6 not 16. I’m trying to figure out why the press felt the need to tell us that she had been humming the song during German class but denied singing loudly or directing the lyrics at her teacher. That seems unimportant. What’s important is that for singing a stupid kid’s song that has been around forever Administrators pulled Cox out of class later Friday and asked why she had threatened her teacher. She was suspended Monday. Have we lost our minds? And here’s a better one:
Climbing, swinging and sliding was once a rite of passage during recess, a time for adventure, to see how high, how far and how fast we could go as a kid.
Today, kids find themselves grounded, victims of a culture of fear and injury litigation.
A growing number of school districts are going so far as to ban the game of tag and are even posting signs that read “no running on the playground.”
Is there real danger on the modern playground?
Safety advocates say yes and want to eliminate it.
Their first target: swing sets.
They’ve convinced Portland Public Schools to remove all swings from elementary schools playgrounds.
That’s right, boys and girls, the world can be a dangerous place. So, it is better to shield kids from any possible danger to themselves. So, at recess, do the kids just stand around? I fear for the future. I fear we’re raising a nation of pansies.
Handling a gun stirs a hormonal reaction in men that primes them for aggression, new research suggests.
Psychologists at Knox College in Galesburg, Ill., enrolled 30 male students in what they described as a taste study. The researchers took saliva samples from the students and measured testosterone levels.
They then seated the young men, one at a time, at a table in a bare room; on the table were pieces of paper and either the board game Mouse Trap or a large handgun.
Their instructions: take apart the game or the gun and write directions for assembly and disassembly.
Fifteen minutes later, the psychologists measured saliva testosterone again and found that the levels had spiked in men who had handled the gun but had stayed steady in those working with the board game.
First, I do not buy that testosterone = aggression. Second, a gun v. the game Mousetrap? Gimme a break. For a real test, do a gun v. a power tool. I’d say the power tool would probably trigger more manly thoughts than a gun and, therefore, more evil testosterone.
The most convincing thing I’ve ever read on why 1911s are so great:
See, the 1911 was designed as a combat pistol in an era when one-handed shooting was the norm. After all, when handgun marksmanship started, your left hand was busy with the reins. And so for decades afterward, guys still shot one-handed, their perfectly good south paw hooked around the rear of their belt.
There’s more at gun blogging goodness at The Gun Blogs.
Via AC, comes The Hammer of Truth:
The Tennessee Senate just unanamously passed an eminent domain bill. The measure is almost as effective in protecting the rights of property owners as a masturbating sterile man is effective in producing children.
Heh.
Now, if somebody can explain to me how a cut in spending can result in an increase in revenue collections, then I’ll be happy to give Bredesen the credit.
Ayup.
Sorry, Chris, but you’re wrong. It will be between Taylor and Chris. Elliot’s a goner because he’s kinda nerdy and tried to do a song about being a badass. Katharine is good but she’s good like Whitney Houston is good and no one really listens to that much these days. Taylor’s in because hes’ talented and he’s likable. Chris is in because he’s talented and sings what the kids want to hear. I’ll bet a beer on that.
The Gun Blogs is owned and operated by me. It is an open format blog and anyone can post there, add links, and add polls. If you’ve ever wanted your own blog but didn’t want to use blogger service or pay for hosting; or you didn’t know if you’d like it or stick with it; or if you didn’t think you’d post with any regularity; then this site is for you. Head on over, it’s free. Here’s the welcome and how-to section.
Head on over, sign up and try it out.
Let me know if you have any problems.
Update: Cool, already some gun porn there.
Bullies serve a purpose. Sure, they’re a pain in the ass but they teach valuable life lessons. One of those is that some folks will use their size or physical prowess to intimidate others to bend to their will. It’s good that kids learn that there are folks like that in the world. It can also be a bad experience for kids, of course, but it’s something we all have to go through. Take comfort in the fact that someday you’ll be at your high school reunion and you’ll realize the high school bully is still driving the same car, living at home, and working at the same job he had in high school. Or you’ll be like me and start making fun of the bully to other people at the reunion and they’ll tell you he died in a tragic car accident a few years ago. Awkward.
When I was about seven, there was this other second grader named Neddie (no, it’s not the guy from high school I was talking about). He was kind of a prick and he was the class bully. I guess he was angry his parents named him Neddie because I would have been.
For the longest time, I never had a problem with Neddie but that ended and I became the target Neddie’s dorky-name-induced aggression. One day after school (I walked home), for no good reason I could fathom, he started calling me names. I didn’t really react to it then he hit me in the stomach and I went home crying. It was tough being a seven year old and having been beaten up. And tough to go home to your drill sergeant dad and tell him you’d gotten punked but that’s only because in 1978, we didn’t really use the word punked. When I got home, my dad asked me what was wrong. I told him about Neddie and me getting picked on, that I had been hit and that I wasn’t going back to school, which is a perfectly reasonable solution when you’re 7 years old. He asked me what I did and I said that I just sort of took it as I was unsure what to do. That’s when dad got on the phone and called the school principal to yell at him; and the called the school administrators and told them it was all their fault that I was getting picked on. He demanded something be done and the school established guidelines to eliminate bullying. And the teachers were given anti-bullying courses. It worked and we all smoked dope and sang Kumbaya my Lord the next day. They even passed a law banning bullying.
Nah, I’m fuckin’ with ya. Dad took my little hand in his big hand and said This is how you make a fist. No, don’t put your thumb in your hand or you’ll break your thumb when you hit someone. I looked up and made a swinging motion like I was going to hit someone. He corrected my form and told me when I hit someone, to aim at some place that hurts such as the face, nose, stomach, or head. He also told me that once you’re swinging, you’re committed to that fight so don’t swing unless you mean it or someone will call your bluff. He also said that once you hit someone to keep hitting them until they give up. He then held out his hands to let me practice punching on his palms. He said that if Neddie came up and threatened me that I should just haul off and knock the living shit out of the little bastard and not to stop hitting him until he gave up or ran off. Then my mom (oh how I love her) chimed in with: And if you get your ass whipped again, expect to get another ass-whippin’ when you get home.
The next day, I did just as dad said. Neddie started shit and I punched him square in his stomach. Apparently, Neddie wasn’t used to kids fighting back. When I punched him in his gut, he fell down and I jumped on him and kept hitting him. Then Neddie started to cry and I got up. He ran off crying. I expected more of a fight. Neddie never bothered me again and I learned that you should stand up for yourself.
I told dad about it. He laughed and told me I did right. And no one called any school administrator. In that time, judging from the stories my parents and their friends talk about, every kid got that exact same lesson. Kids were told to stand up to bullies and to fight back. We were also told not to start fights but to damn-sure stick up for ourselves. In today’s world, I don’t know of any parents that would offer that advice to kids. But in today’s world, you see kids on bikes who look like they’re wearing armor. When I was a kid only the goofy kid up the street who was kinda slow had to wear a helmet. Of course, kids don’t walk home from school these days either.
Via Gun Law News, blogomonicon points to some info on gun trace data:
If one accepts this argument, then one policy conclusion becomes inescapable: one-handgun-per-month laws are a failure and should be repealed. The laws specifying that citizens may purchase only one handgun per month are based on the premise that purchases of multiple handguns from gun stores are a major source of supply for interstate gun-runners. According to the Schumer study, two of the three states that supplied the most guns to New York were Virginia and South Carolina, the only states in the nation with one-gun-a-month laws at the time of the study.
Well, not a gun for now:
Apparently the CCW bill in Delaware is getting the daylights “Christmas tree’ed” out of it. Opponents are tacking on as many amendments as they can hoping to forestall the inevitable. DE is already essentially “will issue”, wherein citizens who can articulate a good reason can usually get a permit. It seems that they have the votes to make the shall issue hopes materialize, but some unfortunate additions might get tacked on.
A Norfolk (VA) man found himself wrongfully charged after he was caught with a rifle on school property. The student was violating school rules, but completely within compliance of state law (more on that later).
I always wondered what would happen if you put regular gas into something like a leaf blower that needs two-cycle oil/gas mixture. Now I know.
In the world of television there is a phrase that describes desperation and stupidity, the point where the show tips towards oblivion. That phrase is “jumping the shark”. This comes from the long running series “Happy Days” where in the final season the script writers were so desperate for a bit for sweeps week they had Fonzie (Catch phrase “Aaaay”) water skiing over a ski jump where he jumped over a shark.
In Knoxville City Government the equivalent of “jumping the shark” is, “Where is the glass dome”? This signifies the point in time when City Government (Catch phrase “If you build it they will come”) loses their ability to know when a project will work.
My only question for the South Knox Riverfront project is, “Where is the glass dome”?
All across America local governments are implementing impact fees so new development will pay for some of the new infrastructure costs. Not in Knoxville. Mayor Haslam has announced the first reverse impacts fees in American. The taxpayers pay for the roads, additional parking, parks, and greenways that the developer would normally pay for. So how will it be decided which developers win this taxpayer lottery and gets this special treatment? Good question.
The proposal for the South Knox Riverfront project works like this; TIF’s will be used for roads, additional parking, parks, and greenways. The infrastructure needed for new development.
You may ask why the Mayor would suggest TIF’s instead of bonds or more traditional financing methods. The City can’t. They already jumped the shark. All of the previous “If you build it they will come” failures make it impossible to use bonds. Even if they could be issued who in their right mind would buy them? The only avenue (suckers) left are the taxpayers.
Why do the developers that never win this lottery not sue the City? It seems unfair that only a very select few receive this benefit when everyone else has to do it the old fashioned way. The Robin Hood concept is supposed to work the other way around. Hint, you are supposed to rob from the rich and give to the poor.
The most obvious flaw in this plan is the needed 139 million dollars of taxpayer investment. Here is what supposedly the private developers will do in return:
2,500 new residential units
421,700 square feet of retail space
60,000 square feet of restaurant space
1 million square feet of office space
160 hotel rooms
225 marina boat slips
135,000-square-foot cultural/civic institution
700 garage parking spaces
790 on-street parking spaces
450 off-street parking spaces
11,750 linear feet of new roads
11,000 linear feet of improved roads
51.3 acres of new parks and greenways
1 whitewater kayak course
The whitewater kayak course qualifies as the “glass dome”. It is self-explanatory.
Is this as stupid as the Worsham Watkins glass dome for the Market Square? I don’t think so. More on the scale of Universe Knoxville but three times as expensive. Before the pack attacks and claims I am “an aginer” can we look at some of the really really stupid parts of this plan?
The 135,000-square-foot cultural/civic institution is completely asinine. Less than two miles away we already have one of those and it ain’t doing so great.
1 million square feet of office space will really help the downtown office market. I am sure that every building owner and real estate firm is just jazzed about this idea. That is enough for a 400 square foot office for each of the 2500 condo residents. Jump that shark Mayor.
421,700 square feet of retail space is enough for 281 trendy boutiques. The merchants on Market Square are going to love this.
60,000 square feet of restaurant space can provide 30 new restaurants to finish off the restaurants in Market Square and the Old City.
Let’s review, the City of Knoxville has spent over 280 million taxpayer dollars trying to revive and restore downtown Knoxville and NOW they suggest spending another 139 million taxpayer dollars to kill all economic activity downtown and move it across the river?
May I make a suggestion; shouldn’t we have a voter referendum on this rather than allowing City Council a few votes to make the decision?
Ask yourself these simple questions:
Is it the TRUTH?
Is it FAIR to all concerned?
Will it build GOODWILL and BETTER FRIENDSHIPS?
Will it be BENEFICIAL to all concerned?
Getting overwhelmed with spam again. SK2 thinks blogspot blogs are spam. Beyond my control though I’ve recovered some of the comments. If you use blogspot, leave the URL blank or use a tinyurl.
Update: I keep removing blogspot from the blacklist but it keeps putting it back.
Michael Hayden, who will likely be the next head of the CIA – which ought to maybe know something about the fourth amendment, once had this conversation:
QUESTION: Jonathan Landay with Knight Ridder. I’d like to stay on the same issue, and that had to do with the standard by which you use to target your wiretaps. I’m no lawyer, but my understanding is that the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution specifies that you must have probable cause to be able to do a search that does not violate an American’s right against unlawful searches and seizures. Do you use—
GEN. HAYDEN: No, actually—the Fourth Amendment actually protects all of us against unreasonable search and seizure. That’s what it says.
QUESTION: But the measure is probable cause, I believe.
GEN. HAYDEN: The amendment says unreasonable search and seizure.
QUESTION: But does it not say probable—
GEN. HAYDEN: No. The amendment says unreasonable search and seizure…
GEN. HAYDEN: … Just to be very clear—and believe me, if there’s any amendment to the Constitution that employees of the National Security Agency are familiar with, it’s the Fourth.
Be afraid.
Update: BTW, the fourth reads:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
I suppose that, technically, he may be correct that the Fourth Amendment actually protects all of us against unreasonable search and seizure. But it seems to me that he’s not even acknowledging that probable cause with respect to warrants is in there.
Update 2: Xrlqy Wrlqy says I am wrong. I’m inclined to concur. However, I think we use warrants far less often than we should, which is what probable cause refers to. That said, eliminating warrants where we usually would use them (which we’ve done in some cases), rather makes the entire probable cause section rather, err, unimportant. I think that’s a bad idea. Why include the warrant language if it’s not necessary? What am I missing here?
In the first state to pass the so-called “Stand Your Ground” law last year, it is expected to be a defense so far to three people: A tow truck driver who shot an unarmed man, a suspected gang member who shot another suspected gang member, and someone involved in a suspected felony drug deal.
That’s been Florida’s experience with legislation some Minnesota legislators want to pass here. And Sarah Brady and local citizen activists are urging Minnesotans to fight it.
“Let me be clear: People are dead because of this law elsewhere, and the people who killed them are using the law to try to get away with murder,” said Brady, the wife of former Reagan Press Secretary James Brady, who was shot in the assassination attempt on the former president. “This law encourages the most aggressive people in society to act more aggressively than is necessary. I urge the Legislature to reject this.”
Is she really so stupid as to suggest that gang bangers and drug dealers wouldn’t have shot one another had this law not been enacted?
David Hardy reports that The Gun Guys (who are actually just one guy, a comedian you’ve never heard of) are at it again. This time, he’s all crazy, hysterical and lying about the recent Castle Doctrines Laws, which he says are a license to murder.
It may be a bit scary but the techonology is pretty cool:
The department has three black and white patrol cars and one unmarked car equipped with the ALPR system, created by Pips Technology Inc., based in Tennessee.
The four vehicles are outfitted with a camera and sensors attached to each corner of the car.
The system works by scanning every plate that comes in the path of the sensor. Every time it reads a plate, the computer inside the patrol car dings and both a picture of the actual plate as well as the plate number the computer reads appear on the screen. The plate number is then run through a database, which has highlighted plates that fall in the category of lost or stolen, and drivers who are wanted for a felony.
The system runs in the background, so it does not distract the officer from scanning the streets, Morgan said. An alarm sounds if a matching plate is found.
If a plate matches a warranted plate in the computer’s database, an alarm sounds and the warrant information appears on the screen. This information tells the officer specifically what the plate has been warranted for, but does not say if it is currently still wanted.
Via an anonymous commenter, comes this:
Earlier this year in New York City, a public-heath regulation went into effect that set a new and very troublesome precedent, one that insinuates government agencies into personal medical matters.
In mid-January, the city began legally requiring laboratories that do medical testing to report to the Health Department the results of blood-sugar tests for city residents with diabetes — along with the names, ages, and contact information on those patients.
City officials are not only analyzing these data to assess patterns and changes in diabetes prevalence in the city, but are planning “interventions.” Simply put, diabetics will soon receive letters and phone calls from city officials offering advice and counsel on how to effectively deal with their medical condition. If you wish to keep your medical data confidential, you cannot.
Unbelievable. The nanny state marches on.
The good ol’ Gock 7 quote from the movie Die Hard:
That punk pulled a Glock 7 on me. You know what that is? It’s a porcelain gun made in Germany. It doesn’t show up on your airport X-ray machines, and it costs more than you make here in a month.
Of course, it’s crap. Buy Nylar tells us about more crap. Seems some sheriff in Jersey is all alarmed:
Cops recover assault weapon, all but invisible to X-rays
Of course, if the headline were accurate, it would read Cops recover pistol, not at all invisible to X-rays. More
Essex County Sheriff Armando Fontoura said yesterday he will issue a warning to other police agencies after his officers seized an assault weapon made with so little metal it does not clearly show up on a security X-ray.
Narcotics officers found the Professional Ordnance Carbon-15 Type-97 pistol in the car of a drug suspect in Newark and noticed it was a cut above the usual weaponry employed by local drug dealers, Fontoura said.
Officers in his ballistics laboratory, who said they had never seen an assault weapon made with so much plastic, had it taken to Newark Liberty International Airport yesterday for a test-run through the security scanners — minus its 30-round clip.
The image on the X-ray appeared as a straight metal rod, with no outline of a stock or a trigger guard, something an inattentive security guard may view as no more threatening than a curling iron, the sheriff said.
These are the popular Carbon rifles. Sure, they’re made of quite a bit of plastic (like a Glock) but they have a great many metal parts (also, like a Glock) that will show up on a metal detector, like the barrels, springs, hammer, disconnector, buffer tubes, etc. Plus, ammo is easy to see on an X-ray machine.
Lame hysteria but the anti-gunnies may push it soon.
Dr. Helen notes that some nannyists want to regulate french fries. I loved this remark, from comments:
Smoking bans.
Seat belt laws.
Bicycle helment laws.
Gun storage laws.
Harrasement laws.
Speech laws.
Etc, ad nauseum.I bet they win too.
Nanny knows best. Now shut up and eat your peas.
Another local yokel pipe dream for Blount County:
Taxpayers are putting up $20 million to buy the land from Rarity Communities, who will develop it. (CLARIFICATION: Blount County, Alcoa, Maryville, and Knox County will purchase the property from Rarity for $10 million and spend $10 million more on infrastructure. The county is not buying the property for $20 million.)
Again, plans to spend tax payer dollars on questionable items of questionable benefit. It’s supposed to be a business district but the first items slated are for condos. Additionally:
The deal is being announced as if it were done, yet there has been no public input.
Read the whole thing. R. Neal has done a lot of legwork covering this.
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
blog advertising is good for you
You are currently browsing the SayUncle weblog archives for May, 2006.
Powered by
WordPress
Theme provided by Robb Allen
1.791 seconds.