What’s the cheapest place to get airline tickets? Trying to get to the Gun Blogger Rendezvous for as little as possible.

Constitutional rights are apparently tricky and complex, if the defendent is a police officer. A while back, I noted a case where some Illinois police officers were charged with illegal possession of machine guns. Here’s the latest:

Charges that an Illinois State Police sergeant illegally possessed a machine gun were dismissed Wednesday by a federal judge, who ruled that the law was “unconstitutionally vague” as applied to him.

In federal court in East St. Louis, U.S. District Judge David R. Herndon dropped the charges against Sgt. James V. Vest of O’Fallon, Ill., who was lead rifle instructor for the department’s District 11 in the Metro East area. Herndon’s 26-page order says the confusion is over the federal law’s exception for police officers, and whether Vest could reasonably be expected to know whether he was breaking the law.

Vest was one of four people, including two other Illinois state troopers, separately accused in January of illegally possessing machine guns. Such fully automatic weapons are banned by federal law except for certain uses, such as by the military and police agencies, or by people with a special license, which the four did not have.

But if this were a civilian, there’d be nothing vague. You’d be in jail for ten years and pay a $250K fine. More:

The case against Vest concerned an M-4 machine gun, essentially a short-barrel form of the standard M-16 military weapon, that he bought in 1998 and used in his state police training classes. The charges allege that he lacked authority from the state to buy or possess the weapon.

Vest argued that he bought and used it under the “law enforcement exception” in the federal law. Some police agencies have machine guns in their arsenals, particularly for their tactical teams.

Herndon noted that the prosecution never claimed that Vest ever used the M-4 for anything but official purposes. The judge said the government argued that a law enforcement agency, not a single police officer, has the authority to permit possession of a machine gun.

But Herndon wrote that the federal law granting that authority was too vague in this instance to support the charges against Vest.

“How would a police officer/lead rifle instructor such as Vest ever know whether his possession of a machine gun or other prohibited weapon was legal, as there is no guidance under the (statute) as to what constitutes proper authority,” the judge wrote. “It does not appear that this statute was designed to criminalize police officers even if they may be guilty of mere technical violations.”

Given that Vest apparently used it only for law enforcement purposes, Herndon said, charging him “seems to go against the purpose” of the federal law.

The law is not vague. There is a legal and lawful manner for police agencies to obtain NFA weapons. And they’re tax exempt.

Some animals are more equal than others.

Update: At subguns, they have more:

Vest, a firearms instructor and former State Police Tactical Response Team or SWAT team leader, is accused of violating a federal law regulating automatic weapons. An indictment states Vest improperly ordered the M-16 in 1998 from a California supplier and then failed to register it with federal authorities. A prosecutor has said Vest used a fake state police letterhead to order the weapon that he paid for with his own money.

So, he forged documents to obtain his illegal weapon. That he bought with his own money.

KABA:

Statement from Mayor Bloomberg On Guilty Plea by Michael Spallone of Woodhaven Rifle and Pistol Range

“Strict enforcement of our local gun laws is critical in the fight against illegal guns. After undercover investigations revealed violations in sales practices at Woodhaven Rifle and Pistol Range, Inc., the gun dealer, Michael Spallone, today pled guilty to disorderly conduct and as a result will pay $1,000 in fines and restitution. In addition, his dealer’s license remains revoked by the NYPD. His guilty plea sends a strong message: any violation of the law that allows illegal guns to flow onto our streets will be vigorously pursued. If you break the law, you will pay the price. I thank Queens District Attorney Richard Brown … for recognizing that rigid enforcement of gun laws can help prevent the tragic consequences of gun violence.”
——-

KABA Note: This is the gun dealer who initially refused to sell to Mayor Mike’s sting squad. They came back the next day with proper paperwork, but with a serial number transposed, and badgered him to make the sale, which he did, after checking with the Suffolk County Police who said it was okay. See the story here.

See past coverage here. Gun Owners of America doesn’t like it:

A Second Amendment group is warning gun owners that a “massive gun control bill” is now working its way through Congress — and is surprisingly close to becoming law.

Gun Owners of America also admits that it is the only national pro-gun group to oppose the “NICS Improvement Act of 2005″ (H.R. 1415).

Introduced by gun control advocate Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, H.R. 1415 is intended to improve the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), which screens would-be gun buyers for mental problems or criminal convictions that would bar them from buying guns.

Most background checks are processed through NICS in seconds, but some are delayed if the FBI lacks complete, updated, and automated information from the states.

The bill notes that approximately 24 million criminal records are not automated or not accessible to NICS; and another 16 million criminal records are not up to date. Some lack information on whether an arrested person was convicted or acquitted, for example.

Many states have failed to computerize the necessary information and make it available to NICS in a “usable format,” and that’s what the McCarthy bill would address.

But Gun Owners of America warns that the bill would give the states hundreds of millions of dollars to “further prop up the unconstitutional Brady Law.” GOA argues that the federal government lacks the authority to conduct background checks on gun buyers under the Second and Tenth Amendments.

Seen at David Hardy’s, UN report proclaims self-defense is not a right:

“20. Self-defence is a widely recognized, yet legally proscribed, exception to the universal duty to respect the right to life of others. Self-defence is a basis for exemption from criminal responsibility that can be raised by any State agent or non-State actor. Self-defence is sometimes designated as a “right”. There is inadequate legal support for such an interpretation. Self-defence is more properly characterized as a means of protecting the right to life and, as such, a basis for avoiding responsibility for violating the rights of another. “

There’s more. Seems to me that protecting the right to life would be, err, a right.

Jeff wanted me to let you folks know that:

Could you let folks know (perhaps a quick post) that Hosting Matters moved Alphecca.com to a new server last night and totally fucked everything up. Files, index pages, archive folders, etc have disappeared. Hopefully they’re working on restoring it but in the meantime, all that comes up is a blank page.

Update: He’s back.

Can I get that AK in paisley?

If I understand all this correctly, a senator (apparently Ted Stevens, who we by now all know is a total douche) can stop legislation all by his own self by placing a mysterious voodoo known as a secret hold on said piece of legislation.

I’m not up to date on all the hooey that governs senate rules but here’s an idea: Get off our asses and elect one Libertarian senator to the senate. Have him place secret holds on all legislation. We’ll call him Mr. No. He’ll put holds on everything. Stop passing stupid laws. Stop growing the government at a rate that is faster than the economy. Stop the growth of the bureaucracy.

Maybe those free-staters can get on that.

I’ve opined in the past that denying felons the right to vote or the right to arms opens up a whole can of worms. We’ll call it can of worms because if I call it slippery slope, someone will say that’s a fallacy. Then I’ll tell them to leave their high school debate team bullshit back in high school (see rule #4). The reason it’s a can of worms is because if we accept that we can deny felons those rights, why not limit others? After all, we may not want them assembling peaceably, because that could be gang activity. We may not want them to be free from self-incrimination because, well, they’ve obviously done something wrong before. We may want them to convert to Christianity because those who find religion are more likely to reform. Yes, those are ridiculous extremes and that is the point. Where do we as a society draw the line?

This brings up Sean Braisted who writes:

I have trouble comprehending people who think just because a person doesn’t have legal status in this country, they should have no legal rights whatsoever. If that were the case, than the Government could easily just strip legal immigrants/citizens of their citizenship, thus making the Government unaccountable to the laws. This notion that illegal immigrants are somehow less than human, and shouldn’t receive medical treatment or have any basic human rights, is just ludicrous.

I like Sean’s blog. He’s a smart guy and reasonable. But I asked a simple question:

So, should illegal immigrants have the right to keep and bear arms? The right to vote?

Illegal immigrants cannot legally own a firearm (of course, they cannot legally be in the country either). In response to the first question, he answered:

As for Guns, unless they are members of a well regulated militia…well…you know the liberal position

Yes, and that position is total bullshit that is unsupported by any documents around at the time of the founding. And there is nothing to support the position without either making stuff up or disregarding the structure of the English language. So, for question two:

As for the right to vote, it is specifically limited to citizens of the United States.

Most matters regarding voting are left up to the states. The constitution doesn’t enumerate a right to vote specifically but mentions the right to vote. Determining those who can vote is generally up to the states:

The Constitution contains many phrases, clauses, and amendments detailing ways people cannot be denied the right to vote. You cannot deny the right to vote because of race or sex. Citizens of Washington DC can vote for President; 18-year-olds can vote; you can vote even if you fail to pay a poll tax. The Constitution also requires that anyone who can vote for the “most numerous branch” of their state legislature can vote for House members and Senate members. Note that in all of this, though, the Constitution never explicitly ensures the right to vote, as it does the right to speech, for example. This is precisely why so many amendments have been needed over time – the qualifications for voters are left to the states. And as long as the qualifications do not conflict with anything in the Constitution, that right can be withheld.

The amendments that do refer to the right to vote contain the phrase The right of citizens of the United States to vote . So, you know, he may have a legitimate out on that one.

Since Mr. Braisted believes in the fictitious collective right model of the second amendment (which says there’s no right at all and that the amendment doesn’t mean what it says) and thinks that the constitution grants the right to vote only to citizens, he’s avoided the question. Mind you, he thinks there is a right to health care and there is a right to being innocent until proven guilty, neither of which I can find guaranteed in my copy of the constitution. I’m not going to take his word for it since he ignores rights specifically enumerated. Getting Mr. Braisted to answer the question is like pulling teeth. Do we acknowledge that illegal immigrants can be denied rights or not? Or do we pick and choose which rights are restricted? Do we, for example, strip them of 5th amendment protections (though Mr. Braisted may or may not think that amendment means what it says it means) and deport them without due process of law?

Conversely, what if a State gave illegal immigrants the vote?

So, let’s try again. Mr. Braisted will not answer the question directly, so, dear reader, what are your thoughts?

Update: Publicola weighs in:

Most people reason that the enumeration of certain rights in the constitution are for the benefit of the citizens of this country. If you’re not a citizen or if you happen to be outside the country then the governmental gloves are off.

My take on things is that this is wrong. The constitution is a document which was designed to limit government as it was created, not grant protection from the almost almighty government to certain classes.

So does J0e:

… my position has long been that if someone has proved themselves so dangerous to society they can’t be trusted with possession of a gun then they can’t be trusted with a can of gasoline and a book of matches either.

Or so they say:

In inner Sydney, robberies with a firearm increased by 111 per cent over the last two years

Indeed:

This being San Francisco, and CNN being CNN, what did the link to the story at the CNN.com site say? That’s right: *SUV hits 14 people in 20-minute rampage, 1 dead.

Ben says:

Last week, a federal appeals court ruled that certain types of court awards are NOT income…..so what? Well, the implications could be far reaching. The IRS has, like all bureaucracies with broad powers, assumed that they are pretty much in charge of determining what is “income.” The IRS has always pretty much taken the stance that if it shows up in your bank account, they get a piece of it. The court said, in effect, back off.

Specifically:

Murphy argued that just as compensation for physical injuries only makes one whole after a loss, the same is true of awards for emotional distress. In short, it is not income within the meaning of the 16th Amendment to the Constitution. The appeals court agreed, ruling that Murphy’s award for emotional distress is not income and therefore not taxable.

I’m not sure what defines “bad” in this brave new world we live in, but the question has importance to me. Do you consider yourself a good person or a bad person?

Don’t answer yet! Otherwise I may have to hurt you.

I was reading an article about concealed carry in South Carolina and one line jumped out and it bothered me.

Over the past 10 years, South Carolina has become a much safer place to live, work and raise a family. Since the General Assembly wisely chose to allow good citizens to carry guns for self-defense, the violent crime rate has sharply declined. And although the mainstream news media largely avoid reporting such facts, the truth is more guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens equals less crime.

So are you “good”. Because if you are not. I may just be coming for you. The state government of South Carolina has implied that you cannot protect yourself effectively, or not at all, and that is good for “bad” people.

When the state decides who is good and bad then we are all categorized cattle.

Even “bad” people have the right to protect themselves from others. No matter what the state says

Seen at Subguns.com:

Q: What rights do you give up with a transferable?

A: Right to tell the wife she buys to much jewelry

For those not in the know, a transferable is a pre-86 machine gun. They are seriously overpriced. For example, this pre-86 M16A1 is listed at $13,750. The military buys new ones for about $700.

The Second Amendment Carnival. via Mr. C.

David Hardy:

The bill to microstamp guns has apparently had an amendment added that would require serial numbers on bullets.

Today, this blog is four years old. I’ve enjoyed it. Hope you have. It’s also that time of year where I look at the numbers (I’m an accountant, it’s what I do). Here’s some:

Pro Gun Progressive crashes a Brady press conference:

What struck me most–there was nobody there. Nobody. The NRA person, the Washington Post reporter covering it, and myself were the only non-Brady staffers there. No ABC. No CBS. No NBC. No local affiliates…nobody. Was a time ten years ago when every time Sarah Brady spoke, the cameras lined the room and somebody like me wouldn’t have been able to get a word in edgewise. There weren’t scads of local reporters, Rosapepe volunteers and campaign workers, etc. Just me, the NRA, the Post, Sarah Brady and her assistants, Casey Anderson, and Jim Rosapepe. An unlikely lot, no?

Heh. And, by the way, the enemy is correct:

Peter Hamm [the Brady Campaign’s Communications Director - Ed.] agreed with me that the worst thing the gun rights movement can do is allow the stereotype that gun owners and gun rights activists are exclusively rural redneck types with beards and beer bellies chasing deer around the woods with AK47s. You know and I know that’s a silly stereotype, but unfortunately it exists, and he made no bones about the fact that the perpetuation of that stereotype only helps their cause. Newsflash for those High Road, FiringLine, etc. type gun rights communities—if you doubt me when I say the worst thing the gun rights community can do is continue to divide ourselves, bicker, infight, and discriminate against the non-Republican members of the movement, you heard it here straight from the Brady Campaign horse’s mouth. The fact of the matter is simple—they agree that nothing works against the gun rights movement more, and helps them do their job better, than the continuation of the idea that gun rights is exclusively a right wing philosophical domain. The more you disagree with me on this front, the more you’re helping the Brady Campaign. It’s that simple.

Indeed. I hate when I see the pro-gun boards bashing the Pink Pistols or other pro-gun groups because they disagree with them on other things. You should accept that any pr0-gun demographic is good for you to hold on to. Do not run them off.

Update: Here’s the presser, that leaves off some details

Seen at arfcom, a chart that shows how 9mm AR-15 velocity in feet per second changes by barrel length (thanks to Randall Rausch at www.ar15barrels.com):

Seen at No Silence Here:

Federal election regulators refused to ease limits on political advertising Tuesday, blocking an effort to let interest groups run radio and television ads mentioning elected officials within weeks of an election.

The Federal Election Commission voted 3-3 on a proposal that would have allowed such ads as long as they addressed public policy issues and did not promote, support, oppose or attack a sitting member of Congress. Supporters of the change said they wanted to strike a balance between campaign ad restrictions and constitutional free speech guarantees.

The measure failed on a tie vote with the commission’s three Democrats voting against the proposal and the three Republicans backing it.

With 70 days left before this year’s general election, the change could have let loose a wave of unrestricted ad spending in the weeks leading up to Election Day. The vote lets stand a provision in the 2002 campaign finance law that requires independent groups to limit the contributions and to disclose the donors of money used to pay for ads that run within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of a general election.

I hate articles like this:

I like guns. I come from a gun family. I am a 2nd Amendment, pro-gun liberal—which makes me a very lonely creature when the subject comes up in casual conversation around the office. And part of the pleasure of any Michael Mann movie is identifying what the fashionable young man is killing people with this season. Sometimes it’s easy. In “Collateral,” Tom Cruise’s primary weapon is a .45-caliber Heckler & Koch USP fed with 12-round clips. This is a terrific lightweight automatic, and Cruise—as a testament to what must have been weeks of trigger time—handles it like a pro. The HK USP is versatile. Winter, summer, whenever. You can dress it down with a pair of loafers, or dress it up with a jacket and tie for a rampage out on the town.

…

The drug cartel guys deploy a variety of very fun assault rifles. Their big gun—and the most overtly political weapon in the film—appears to be a Barrett .50-caliber M107 semiautomatic rifle, a 32-pound, 5-foot-long military sniper rifle that was banned in California starting last year, for the altogether sensible reason that it can bring down airliners

All this in a movie review? First, it’s not a clip. And it is as likely for a .50Cal to take a plane out of the sky as it is a 300 WinMag, 338 Lapua or, even, a 30-06. Which is to say that it hasn’t happened yet and likely won’t.

Denise talks about how to collect guns.

Heh.

USA Today:

A $1.4 billion anti-drug advertising campaign conducted by the U.S. government since 1998 does not appear to have helped reduce drug use and instead might have convinced some youths that taking illegal drugs is normal, the Government Accountability Office says.

The GAO report, released Friday, urges Congress to stop the White House’s National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign unless drug czar John Walters can come up with a better strategy. President Bush’s budget for 2007 asks Congress for $120 million for the campaign, a $20 million increase from this year.

What was the response:

Walters’ office disputed the study and noted that drug-use rates among youths have declined since 1998. A 2005 survey by the University of Michigan indicated that 30% of 10th-graders reported having used an illicit drug the previous year, down from 35% in 1998.

The GAO report is “irrelevant to us,” says Tom Riley, spokesman for the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP). “It’s based on ads from 2½ years ago, and they were effective, too. Drug use has been going down dramatically. Cutting the program now would imperil (its) progress.”

Got that, folks? A government mandated measure of efficiency is irrelevant to them. Criticism and concern about how your dollars are wasted are irrelevant.

Via commentator D.

Publicola gets a witness.

I do not encourage its use, but this the remote sniper is damn cool:

The Remote Sniper. Hah, forget about those pathetic TV-B-Gone things, mad person, and build yourself a Godzilla version which can control a TV or VCR from a quarter of a mile away. Tshaw…take that, sad Idol fans. $30.00 for the plans.

The SAF:

The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) is calling on Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to prosecute New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg for obstruction of justice, for failing to turn over evidence of allegedly illegal firearms transactions to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

In his letter to Gonzales, SAF founder Alan Gottlieb noted reports in a New York newspaper that Mayor Bloomberg has been stonewalling the information his maverick investigation allegedly uncovered during a sting operation earlier this year. That so- called “investigation” was highly criticized by law enforcement when it was first announced more than three months ago.

“Bloomberg’s vigilante operation may have compromised genuine on-going BATFE investigations,” Gottlieb said. “The city’s refusal to turn over so-called ‘evidence’ in this rogue investigation is very suspicious.

“Allegations of criminal wrong-doing,” Gottlieb noted in his letter, “do not necessarily mean the retailers victimized by the mayor’s self-generated publicity have actually committed any crime, yet Bloomberg’s grandstanding has literally convicted them on television and in news columns.”

The NSSF:

The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the trade association for the firearms industry, said today that the failure of New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg to turn over evidence of alleged illegal firearm sales to the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) is telling.

“If these firearms dealers violated federal law there needs to be a full investigation,” said Lawrence G. Keane, senior vice president and general counsel of NSSF. “The fact that Mr. Bloomberg is so afraid to turn over ‘evidence’ to the ATF speaks volumes as to the veracity of his claims.”

Or, you know, he has something to hide. More:

ATF is the appropriate and legally authorized regulatory agency in charge of overseeing enforcement of firearms laws and regulations.

NSSF called upon the mayor to come clean with the “proof” he and his private investigators accumulated in their attempts to circumvent federal law protecting law- abiding firearms dealers from baseless civil suits.

David notes this case:

Judge Haywood Turner is charged with pointing a pistol. Police say it appears to be a case of road rage . . . Investigators say he turned himself in on Friday, and was charged with two misdemeanor counts of pointing a pistol.

Wow. Aggravated assault is a misdemeanor? Err, no:

Aggravated assault, which is a felony:

“occurs when you assault someone…2) With a deadly weapon…”

Special classes get special treatment.

Update: In comments, Alex says:

FYI, The Great State of Georgia actually has a criminal statute titled “Pointing or aiming gun or pistol at another” and it states that “a person is guilty of a misdemeanor when he intentionally and without legal justification points or aims a gun or pistol at another, whether the gun or pistol is loaded or unloaded.” O.C.G.A. 16-11-102.

Looks to me like there’s some leeway in which law you charge someone with.

My personal opinion is that the Republicans have basically abandoned every thing they stood for now that they’re in power, except lowering taxes. So AC’s prediction wouldn’t surprise me:

I can say quite confidentially [err, is it a secret - Ed.] now that the Democrats will take both the US House and the US Senate. I believe it will happen. If Harold Ford doesn’t win, then it will be Webb in Virginia or some other upset.

I doubt they will this time around. Maybe in 2008. There’s simply not enough time for the Ds to have distanced themselves from some of their recent less-than-stellar moments.

Ben:

“The quality of life is going down about as fast as taxes are going up,” said Kuendel, 50, of Atlantic Highlands (New Jersey). He and his wife are looking at houses in Delaware, where there is no sales tax, no income tax and property taxes are relatively low.

Wonder what the correlation between tax rate and U-Haul rentals is?

The latest version of Gun Facts, which comprehensively takes on all the anti-gun arguments.

Cam Edwards says Bloomberg has a double standard:

More than three months after Mayor Bloomberg’s announcement that he had sent private investigators into five states to catch gun dealers making illegal sales, he is refusing to turn over the evidence they’ve gathered to the federal agency that investigates illegal guns.

Analysts said the impasse may have slowed the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms in its investigation of and possible action against gun dealers that broke the law.

The city won’t turn over the evidence, which includes videotapes of gun dealers allowing so-called straw purchases of guns, until the ATF signs an evidence-sharing agreement that would prohibit the agency from “publicly disclosing evidence without notice and consent from the city,” the mayor’s criminal justice coordinator, John Feinblatt, said.

First, the only evidence I’ve seen indicating anyone broke the law was that Bloomberg’s investigators lied on ATF Form 4473, which is a felony. As such, I don’t think it’s a double standard. I think it’s damage control. As mentioned before:

ATF has said they will be investigating every aspect of these “sting” sales (and there were ATF people present who repeated that). This may be bad news for the city, since IF the sales were illegal straw sales, their investigators committed felonies.

One gun was traced TWICE in NYC. The first time was for a crime, so it would have to have been confiscated. Only explanation for how it would later be on the street is that someone in NYC PD is selling seized guns on the street.

My guess is the opposition comes from some potentially embarrassing disclosures, such as the disappearing gun and the fact his agents may have committed a crime.

Of course, I’m willing to bet that if the ATF does conduct an investigation into this, it will be a total sham and nothing will happen.

So, that was it? (spoilers ‘n shit; click more if you want)
Read the rest of this entry »

Brother can you spare 9 million?

Have developers figured out what patsies our leaders in local Knox County government are? Much has been written about TIF’s here at Say Uncle. Even those like myself that cast a wary eye towards TIF’s admit that in theory they can be progressive and provide a reasonable return on investment.

But when every project has to have a TIF to be viable one has to question what is going on.

In Friday’s Knoxville News Sentinel Roger Harris writes that the James Doran Corporation that is building the Northshore Center has come back to City and County government and said that if they do not get a 9 million dollar TIF for roads that the entire 250 MILLION DOLLAR PROJECT MAY NOT BE VIALBE.

Who can really blame them? Isn’t this just smart business? It is easy to see that Mayors Haslam and Ragsdale have sent a message to the development community that if you want some TIF money you just have to ask for it.

Let’s review. The reason development is supposedly good is because it expands the tax base. Unless of course the first 15 years are used to pay off the roads and infrastructure. All across this nation cities and counties are imposing impact fees for roads, schools, and utilities so that infrastructure is NOT paid for by all the taxpayers. The ones that create the need pay for the associated infrastructure.

But not in Knoxville. Here all of the taxpayers pay for the infrastructure through TIF’s. Think of it as opportunity costs. If the tax base does not increase for the first 15 years it must be made up for elsewhere. So what good is development if you receive no tax base for 15 years?

Does it seem like just yesterday there was a City project that had to have multiple injections of taxpayer money to be viable? What happened to the Five Points Village Plaza? After over 4 million dollars of taxpayer money was “invested” it went belly up in five months. Yes, Virgina, five months.

Local government must stop sending the message that projects are only viable if taxpayer money funds them. Do we really have to bribe people to come and live here? Or is this just a transfer payment to powerful developers who control our government?

David Hardy on why gun control proponents are different from other proponents:

Firearm regulations are entirely different. No matter how much is enacted, its political proponents insist that they must have more. As I noted in the previous post, even New York and Massachusetts politicians want more, more. If the laws are failing, it just proves they must be made nationwide, not that something is wrong with the approach.

Nylarthotep takes on the Boston Globe:

Here’s an article by that bastion of truth, the Boston Globe. This article distorts the facts of the Bloomberg sting operation and omits much other relevant data regarding his gun control methods.

…

If you care to read the article you won’t find any mention of the fact that the investigators and Bloomberg are being investigated,(at a glacial rate) by the BATFE for this “sting.” No mention that the investigators were the ones committing a felony by making the straw purchases. They were not law enforcement officials in any sense. There could very well be some question of the dealers not refusing to deal with obvious straw purchases, which would make this a legal issue for the BATFE.

Things are going so well in Boston.

Uhm, don’t think they’re clear on this one:

The families of the South Florida children killed by stray bullets in recent months remain in mourning, but have taken on a new fight: a petition drive to have state lawmakers change the ”Stand Your Ground” law.

They fear the law could complicate how stray-bullet cases are prosecuted and make it easier for those accused in the shooting deaths of their loved ones to walk away without being punished.

Wait, you had some Wolf ammo? How about a Kel-Tec mag?

Some pawn shops have settled and there’s a counter suit in the works after Bloomberg’s investigators broke the law. One guy isn’t settling:

Dennis Alverson said he has received offers from New York City to settle a lawsuit the city brought against his Old Dominion Gun & Tackle shop in Danville.

No deal.

“I’m not in agreement with either of them,” he said during a recent phone interview.

On the case:

Private investigators employed by New York would enter the stores in pairs. One would make inquiries about purchasing the gun and the other – who was uninvolved in the process – filled out the required federal forms to pass the background test.

The city contends that federal law prohibits licensed dealers from selling firearms to someone when the dealer has a reasonable belief that the weapon is being sold to someone other than the buyer.

Federal law also prohibits people from putting incorrect info on the forms to buy a firearm, which the investigators did. More:

In Danville, Alverson bristles at the suggestion that he is a rogue dealer and notes he is in compliance with all state and federal regulations.

“If we were doing anything wrong, we would not be in business because [the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives] would shut us down,” he said.

Alverson said his clients know he has done nothing wrong and the suit has not affected his business.

In an update to this where the ATF classified something and then changed its mind based on loosely defined criteria, Eric Larson gets serious:

This is essentially a test case.

Retroactively reclassifying an item or firearm as a machinegun because it “has features and characteristics of a machinegun” is an admitted new practice by the ATF.

Len makes a perfect test case. A small SOT with new and bold ideas. He is controversial in the sense he has been a pain in the ass for the ATF. No major fanfare if the ATF loses this fight. Work from the bottom up if it wins to avoid major political fallout. The NFA world is effectively that bottom.

Read both classification letters carefully. The item does NOT have to be able to fire a single round to be classified as a firearm and subject to the GCA. The item does NOT have to be able to fire multiple rounds to be a machinegun and subject to the NFA. It only needs to have “features and characteristics of a machinegun”. Now there is no written description on what a characteristic of a machinegun is. It is up to interpretation by whom? On what items/guns? Replacement uppers? At what limit will this new standard be applied? [Remember a barrel is a design characteristic of a machinegun, (and a BB gun as well)].

If we as a community just role over to ATF abuse and intimidation we shall surely find out.”

Indeed.

Norm Stamper, former chief of the Seattle Police Department and an advisory board member of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws and Law Enforcement Against Prohibition – some LEOs who oppose the drug war, writes:

Drug criminals have an unlimited supply of high-powered weapons at their disposal. Kingpins pay mules, usually impoverished, always expendable, to travel to the States and pick up a firearm or two at a gun show. Using the Brady Bill “loophole” (and congressional and presidential failure to extend the ban on assault rifles), all it takes is a phony stateside driver’s license and a handful of cash to walk out with semiautomatic Uzis, AR-15s and AK-47s.

You really think that these guys buy at gun shows? Gimme a damn break. And you also think that the assault weapons ban would have stopped any thing since the ban only impacted the aesthetic features rifles could have?

I’m against the drug war. I’ve supported LEAP in the past. It will not happen again.

Update: In comments, Allison from LEAP writes:

While we support Norm Stamper’s efforts to end prohibition you should understand that LEAP’s only goal is to end prohibition and the accompanying crime and violence. Any statements that a LEAP speaker makes regarding any other issue does not represent the opinions or perspective of LEAP as an organization. Thank you for your support and the support of the entire blogging community.

Norm is on the advisory board and held himself out as such. I don’t think it’s a far stretch to conclude that was LEAP’s position. Regardless, individuals who spread misinformation about the ban on weapons that look like assault weapons, the supposed gun show loophole, and gun control do not endear themselves to me.

A reasonable (by that, I mean not otherwise hysterical) article on gun laws.

To Xrlq on the new addition.

Cool little photo essay on making ammo.

The Tyler hits the fan on the Gene Patterson show “Tennessee This Week” which will air Sunday at noon. If you cannot wait to see this program it is available here. On the panel are Terry Frank, Mike Cohen, and Frank Cagle.

It is particularly interesting when Mike Cohen, a Vice President with Ackermann PR, channels Perry Mason when he puts the witness on trial. The witness of course being Tyler Harber. Cohen was once Mayor Ragsdale’s staff advisor. Cohen was replaced by Mike Arms who was on Knox County Commission. Arms is the Chief of Staff for Mayor Ragsdale with a handsome salary which was recently raised to over $ 125,000 per year. Some say Arms effectively runs County Government allowing Mayor Ragsdale to do more important things like fund raising so he can run for Governor. Arms was replaced on Knox County Commission by Mike Hammond who is seeking to be the Chairman of the Commission after only two years on Commission.

The program develops quickly when Mike Cohen flatly states, “Tyler Harber is a liar”.

Terry Frank and Frank Cagle ask some pointed questions but all answers lead to Cohen’s end game that ” Tyler Harber is a liar. Tyler Harber has a long history of lying”. Yet in the discussion that is not clear at all. The only clear thing that this interview brings to the table is that the Ragsdale administration maintains that ” Tyler Harber is a liar and a troubled young man. We wish him well in his recovery”. Your mileage may vary. The truth may vary. One thing is certain, it is irrelevant if Tyler Harber is a liar. What is important is whether he was following orders from the Mayor or the Mayor’s Chief of Staff.

At least twice Terry Franks says, “There needs to be an investigation”. Each time Cohen flinches.

Gene Patterson is back to his old form here as he draws Cohen close with some soft balls but then closes with the “Mike Wallace” type question, “Is it possible that Tyler Harber was simply a maverick on his own doing things, without knowledge by Mayor Ragsdale, or was he being directed tacitly by Mayor Ragsdale? Cohen’s expression after this question reveals a great deal. Ask poker players what it means when people look down at the table.

This is either a tragedy or a comedy. I have trouble deciding. But it is compelling and entertaining. Based on Cohen’s performance it is clear this play will have four acts.

Correction: Mike Cohen was not replaced by Mike Arms. Cohen was the “communications and government relations guy” and was replaced by Dwight Van de Vate. Arms served two years as both Ragsdale’s Chief of Staff and a District 5 Knox County Commissioner. It was perceived as a conflict of interest by the taxpayers and this was what necessitated the resignation of Arms as County Commissioner and the appointment of WNOX radio executive Mike Hammond to fills Arm’s vacant seat. Dwight Van de Vate was formerly the Director of Communications for the Knox County Sheriff’s Department.

Don’t take nail clippers or Gatorade. But you’ll have no trouble getting dynamite on a plane:

A college student’s checked luggage on a Continental Airlines flight to Houston from Argentina on Friday contained dynamite, and federal authorities are investigating why he had it and what he intended to do with it, an FBI spokeswoman said.

Joe says:

This has to be one the easiest to detect cases. One of the problems with explosives sniffers is that someone can custom make an explosive that isn’t detected by existing detection devices. The problem is similar to the computer anti-virus vendors. They have databases of “virus signatures” they compare suspect attachments and files to. If it matches something they have in their database they flag it as a virus and handle it appropriately. If a new virus shows up they have to update their database with the new signature. Commercially available explosives, such as dynamite, should be within the capabilities of the explosives sniffer.

Ben Cunningham of Tennessee Tax Revolt is blogging here. Good.

Via Terry.

The carnival of cordite is up, for your gun blogging fix.

An NFA weapon (a machine gun that I presume was not registered) was taken in a drug raid. After the raid, police turned it over to a museum. I wonder how that is? An NFA weapon that is unregistered is contraband and cannot lawfully be transferred. David says:

I think there is a museum exception (not dead sure). The only police exception is, as I remember, that they don’t have to pay the $200 tax — but guns on which no tax is paid become “law enforcement only,” I think even if a person offers to buy and pay the tax on that transaction.

Anyone know? If so, I may open a museum.

So, why is this dude stealing my shit?

Should I give the disgusting picture treatment? Or other?

Update: That’ll teach him.

Update 2: Didn’t take the hint, had to get real nasty with it. Removed link because it’s, err, absolutely disgusting. Someone will get their myspace account suspended.

Update 3: Ok, that was too much for even me. Image deleted.

CNS News:

The California Senate on Thursday passed a bill that would require the “microstamping” of semi-automatic handguns — giving cartridges fired from those guns a unique imprint, which according to gun control advocates, would help police solve crimes.

Supporters say microstamping would turn spent cartridges into potential evidence in civil and criminal cases. According the California Million Mom March, “when the police retrieve the bullet casing at a crime scene, they can quickly track down the legal owner of the handgun that fired it.”

Well, any feature that can quickly be disabled with the use of a file isn’t going to be effective. And criminals will just use older guns. Meanwhile, what it seems to be about is:

Nonsense, say Second Amendment supporters, who view the bill as yet another attempt to burden gun manufacturers and further restrict gun sales in the state. They say that gun makers, faced with the added expense of microstamping semiautomatic weapons, would either stop selling their wares in California or drastically raise prices.

Via David.

Nothing beats them, cute little buggers. Stuff I never would think about:

Or Abbie, for a short two syllable name ending with a vowel, making it easy to reach those high notes when calling.

The box of truth looks at how rounds do against kevlar helmets. Via marc, who says:

All I can say is even with a kevlar helmet on I still don’t want to be shot in the head with a .357.

Don’t seem to do much for rifles, either.

AC: How did he get that Gatorade on the plane?

But I know one when I see them. Rich says:

First, I’m opening up the comments section to all of you to post your definitions of liberal and conservative. Tell me and howie how you would define the terms. In your oomments, please identify how you describe yourself.

Second, I’m going to invite two bloggers, one conservative and one liberal, to define their ideologies, and I’ll post their definitions here in a future post. I’m going to let a true conservative and a true liberal to speak for themselves, rather than attempt to speak for them.

James Na of the blog Guns and Butter has a piece in the Seattle Times:

First, as a matter of principle, a free, open society like ours does not, and ought not, preemptively restrict freedom of the general population out of fear that a small criminal minority would misuse that freedom.

crebralfix shows you how it’s done, without blowing your dudes off.

Mlive:

Grand Rapids neighborhoods that were virtual shooting galleries earlier this summer have quieted down substantially thanks in part to stepped up police patrols, curfew sweeps and increased community contact. The effort to stanch the violence — dubbed Operation All-Out by Grand Rapids Police Chief Harry Dolan — is likely to continue through September, as it should.

For sure, there has been a cost, $96,000 in police overtime. But the payoff for citizens and the city as a whole is more than worth it.

What’s missing? Amazing how policing is more effective than gun control.

I thought it was funny:

As long as I have been reading SayUncle, I always assumed that all the posts where written by Unc. I have noticed some things that seemed a little off-topic or were written with a slightly different political viewpoint than normal, but I just figured that the maybe Unc had been up late or eating paint chips or something.

Heh.

Yes, the confusion over who posts seems to come up. Reason attributes a post to me when it’s actually co-blogger Brutal Hugger. And in the comments to the same post Reason cites, another blogger says he ain’t reading me no more. That’s happened before. But Dave came back.

My $0.02 is my website slogan: Remember, I do this to entertain me . . . not you. Or as my Terms of Use say:

This site exists entirely for my amusement. If it amuses you too, that’s cool but not necessary.

You don’t want to read, I don’t care. But here at SayUncle, we like to get our debate on. That’s why I brought Brutal Hugger on board. I generally stay out of the arguments made by other posters here because I don’t want to appear to be picking favorites in a debate. But I find Fug saying he’s out of here amusing since he emailed me once to ask why I de-linked him. I didn’t de-link him, I just had some technical issues. He even said in those emails that he took issue with BH but respected my site. It’s speaks of a person that they cannot bear reading those who disagree with them, particularly on issues they hold dear.

I always get this flak over co-bloggers and guest-bloggers. I do sometimes wonder if it’s worth it. You know, encouraging debate and all. I guess I could just type and only link/read those who I agree with. But that’s not stimulating. As I said before:

Now, I’d like all the readers to agree with everything everyone says and for us to all hold hands, have a coke and a smile, and smoke some dope while singing Kumbaya. But that would be boring. No challenge. No entertainment. Posts would go like this: I’d post something witty and insightful. You’d all comment indeed. And we’d get bored.

It’d be cool if everyone liked me and all the other folks that post here, but it isn’t necessary.

Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

Update: Fug and I spoke offline. Long and short, I think we both overreacted but we kissed and made up. Well, OK, we didn’t really kiss.

Len Savage, of Historic Arms LLC, made a belt-fed upper receiver in 7.62X39 for use on an M-11 called the BM 3000. Initially, the ATF ruled that said item was not a firearm and not a machine gun. The ATF changed its mind and decided that the upper receiver was actually a machine gun because, well, I’m not sure why as it seems highly technical. Now, the ATF has said he needs to register the BM 3000s he made and they cannot be sold to the public. Operating under the assumption that the BM 3000 was neither a firearm nor a machine gun, he could have sold them to anyone. He did not. But he could have. Then, with the ATF’s changed ruling, some folks could be in trouble. The letters are here. Interesting case and good luck to Mr. Savage, who you may recall is the expert in the video that exposes ATF agents trying to assert that a malfunctioning and otherwise legal semi-automatic weapon was a machine gun.

Regardless, ATF’s reconsideration of some issues has the potential to make people criminals through no wrong-doing of their own. Good thing Len hasn’t sold any.

Similar to the Wrenn case, where Wrenn made and sold semi-automatic versions of the Maxim machine gun. Wrenn plead guilty.

Update: post on message board was deleted.

Heh:

convince him a)that Glocks are useless pieces of tupperware and make the baby JMB cry. b) that Glocks are simply what St. Gaston says, “perfection.” c) of any other strongly held belief.

Well, c) would be they’re damn fine guns.

In New Hampshire comes something hella lame:

The state Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that the government can keep and destroy more than 500 CDs taken from Michael Cohen, owner of Pitchfork Records in Concord, in 2003 even though the state failed to prove that a single disk was illegal.

Cohen was arrested for attempting to sell bootleg recordings. But the police case collapsed when it turned out that most of the recordings were made legally. Police dropped six of the seven charges, and Cohen went to trial on one charge. He beat it after the judge concluded that the recording was legal.

However, the police refused to return Cohen’s CDs. In the state Supreme Court’s Tuesday ruling, Chief Justice John Broderick, writing for the majority, reasoned so poorly that it appeared as if he’d made up his mind ahead of time.

Update: In comments, Tom notes there’s more to the story:

After beating the criminal charges, Cohen asked for all of his music back, saying he wanted it for his personal collection, not for his store’s sale bins. In doing so, he acknowledged that there were bootlegs among them and that selling those would be illegal, according to court records.

Well, there wasn’t enough to prove that in a court of law so I’d say give him his stuff back. Your thoughts?

I wrote about. Gun Law News sets me straight:

The starting point for these debates is an assumption that proposed legislation is all about a federally issued permit. It is not.

There’s more.

Seen in comments here (and written by this guy), I present without comment:

SYNOPSIS:

I am a U.S. merchant seaman with a Second Amendment cause of action that has been languishing in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia since 2002. Because I am an unrepresented civil plaintiff with a Second Amendment case I have been jerked around the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Appellate Procedure, and the U.S. Supreme Court these past 4 years until I discovered the biggest act of corruption to date. Because I am a resident of Arkansas, using my Arkansas address on every complaint and pleading these past 4 years, no judge or court clerk ever though to look at the law on jurisdiction (28 U.S.C. 1402(a)(1)) to tell me that the U.S. District Court for DC DOES NOT HAVE JURISDICTION OVER ME! That means that my case for these last 4 years is VOID FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION. I am now fighting to get my case in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas (Little Rock), Northern Division (Batesville).

REBUTTAL:

Instead of the federal licensing scheme how about using the Federal Premption Doctrine from the U.S. Constitution’s supremacy clause preempting local and State gun control laws that restrict, prohibit, or otherwise infringe upon the Second Amendment right (along with the Ninth, Tenth, Thirteenth, and Fourteenth Amendments) to openly keep and bear arms in intrastate and interestate as a form and function of the Common Defence clause (”Defence” is the original spelling as used) in the Preamble to the U.S. Constitution?

The power of the States and of the Federal Government to legislate and regulate the Second Amendment has almost always been done in a prohibitive manner through the Commerce Clause since Roosevelt’s threatened Court Packing Plan of the 1930’s. Nothing is every said or written about legislating and regulating the Second Amendment in a positive manner through the Common Defence clause of the Preamble.

If the FCC can employ the Federal Premption Doctrine for the Amateur Radio Service with PRB-1 (http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/regulations/local/prb-1_program.html) as a matter of protecting the First Amendment for amateur radio operators then the BATF/E can employ the Federal Premption Doctrine to protect Second Amendment rights of American gun owners restoring the right to openly keep and bear arms in intrastate and interstate travel by preempting local/State (and federal?) gun control laws that prohibit or otherwise interfere with that right.

Such a case is in the process of moving from the corrupt U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (Case Nos. 02-1434, 02-1434, and 03-2160) to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas (Little Rock), Northern Division (Batesville). As you may know the original 1939 U.S. Supreme Court case, United States v. Miller began in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Arkansas (Fort Smith).

The present case that is on the move to Little Rock/Batesville, Arkansas is HAMRICK v. PRESIDENT BUSH, et al. It is a Second Amendment case for National Open Carry Handgun from a U.S. merchant seaman’s point of view taking the Second Amendment through the Common Defence clause of the Preamble and through the Ninth, Tenth, Thirteenth, and Fourteenth Amendment. The case employs the RICO Act to allege the United States is racketeering an unlawful and an unconstitutional protection scheme over the Second Amendment in addition to the central cause of action of government wrongdoing, retaliation, and harassment of me for being a protaganist for Second Amendment rights of American civilian seafarers when the U.S. Government requires small arms training as a prerequisite for seafarers seeking employment aboard U.S. Government vessels when the U.S. Coast Guard refuses to provide occupational documentations of such compulsory training in the form of an endorsement on the “Merchant Mariner’s Document” (ID card). I want the endorsement to right “National Open Carry Handgun” as a matter of right not as a matter of licensing.

If “National Open Carry Handgun” was the social and legal norm for the first 100 years of our nation’s history then it ought to be part of today’s social and legal norms for the simple reason that it is THE “constitutional norm.”

All gun control laws are nothing more than GOVERNMENT placating to the phobic of society on the false premise that government can protect society from the criminal element. This is tantamount to government supporting a delusion for the sake of government.

Good news. We can now get stem cells from embryos without destroying the embryos. While I see the “embryos = human life” argument as a bunch of semantic nonsense, this gets that issue off the table. We can get all the benefits of stem cell research without all the messy political fighting.

We’ll soon know whether the scientific community exagerrated the benefits of stem cells to win the political battle over federal funding.

That’s the question of the day. Michael posts a comment he recieved:

Just one opinion, so take it for what it’s worth, but I hate a bunch of people having access to posting on your blog. I read it for you…not for them. They can have their own blogs. Or set up a guest blogger blog on KnoxNews.com. But I don’t like them on yours and find myself reading it less because I have to sort through posts.

I feel his pain. I’ve taken some flak for a couple of the co-bloggers I have here. Thibodeaux annoysed (not sure where that guy went) the lefty readers and Brutal Hugger annoys the righty readers. Les Jones says:

Even though I’m on one of those folks with posting privileges at No Silence Here, in all honesty I generally don’t much care for group blogs. I prefer a blog with a single voice. For instance, I think Volokh.com would be a better blog if Eugene Volokh was the only person posting there. As it is, there are too many voices and too many topics represented.

I do, however, like community blogs such as KnoxViews.com where anyone can set up an account and start posting. That’s more of a hybrid of blogs and message boards, and at KnoxViews it’s working.

I do think guestblogging is a good practice when the blog’s author is out of town or unavailable.

I like some aspects of group blogs. I like The Gun Blogs, you see good stuff there (I’m biased since it is my site) but the readership isn’t huge. So, let’s do a poll:

So, today I got a Google news alert for assault weapons ban and it pointed me here. I was all like Whoa, that sounds familiar. Yeah, because I wrote that. I guest blog over at No Silence Here on occasion, which is a blog hosted at the local newspaper’s site. Google picks it up as a news source.

Cool, I’m now the media. I’m part of the problem.

Note to Michael: I’d post there more often. But, let’s face it, I have a bit of a potty-mouth.

Aunt B.:

Lord knows I’m not ready to sit around drinking moonshine and laughing at the less fortunate (which I believe to be the main pastimes of libertarians, though I have no real evidence to back that up)

Heh. It’s also good to see self-professed liberals voicing concern about simultaneous trends to disarm regular folks and make battle-ready the police.

I was thinking about this case and a quote really stuck out:

But, prosecutors say he also has six weapons, bought within seven months, and all unaccounted for, except for the one they say Cletus Rivera used to kill Officer Scott Wertz on August 6th.

We know that Federal law prohibits the federal government from establishing any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions and dispositions. So, how then do prosecutors know that this man bought these firearms? Recall that:

… ATF relies upon federal firearms licensee (FFL) records to trace firearms recovered in crimes through its National Tracing Center. Inaccurate or incomplete record keeping makes the tracing of firearms involved in violent crimes virtually impossible.

So, they likely traced the gun to this man. Then, without the use of a registry, somehow figured out he’d bought other guns? Rather curious if you ask me. And, by curious, I mean total bullshit. Is there a state database in PA?

Alphie doesn’t like the idea and says the NRA is compromising rights again:

Yet in order to bear arms I must take a class, stand in line for hours in order to talk to deal with frustrated civil servants, pay an outrageous fee, undergo an invasive background check and (the final indignity) get fingerprinted like a criminal so my prints can be stored in files in both Nashville and Washington.

He also notes Andy Barniskis says:

I expect that what will be dictated by congress in the future–if not immediately–will include fingerprinting, mug shots, mandatory training, and high administrative costs. And, once the principle of federally dictated standards is established, increasingly restrictive standards could become a backdoor way for carry permits to be de facto prohibited by federal regulation, without congressional action. …

We will be better off continuing to fight reciprocity issues at home, on a state-by-state basis, never forgetting that licensing a right converts that right to a privilege. Ultimately, we should not lose sight of our ideal, that armed self defense is a genuine constitutional right, and genuine rights should not be subject to the prior constraint of licensing.

I am as gun nut as they get. But here’s where I often disagree with other gunnies. The notion that one can merely carry arms (those that disagree with me say the Second Amendment does say bear) willy-nilly is not generally supported by, well, anything other than the word bear in the second amendment, which has other connotations. I think the states can regulate the wearing of arms. The Tennessee constitution, for example, says:

That the citizens of this State have a right to keep and to bear arms for their common defense; but the Legislature shall have power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms with a view to prevent crime.

At the founding, concealed weapons were commonly viewed as the tools of assassins and cowards. And they were scorned. Nowadays, it’s just good fasion sense to go concealed. So, folks were understandably not keen on concealed weapons.

But I do agree that federal carry permit regulation is bad joo-joo.

I don’t need one but some of them come with free guns:

A creative marketing campaign conjured up by Prestige Nissan General Sales Manager Dan Crumpler offers buyers of used or new Nissan SUVs or trucks in August a choice of a Remington 1187 shotgun or a Remington 700 rifle.

Meanwhile, a board member of a fake pro-gun group is saying gun makers shouldn’t advertise. More here.

Note to the gentleman in the blue Ford pickup:

Sir,

I respect and appreciate your love for our lord and saviour and the fact you’ve chosen to let me and others know of said love with the use of a bumper sticker that says: I Love Jesus.However, I would also ask that you consider loving your gas pedal too.

People ponder often What would Jesus do? I contend that he would get out of the way and allow others to pass instead of holding up traffic on Alcoa Highway.

Sincerely,

SayUncle

Kopel:

During the recent war against Israel, Hezbollah used night vision equipment which had been supplied by Iran, as detailed in a new article by the Jewish Institute of National Security Affairs. Iran had obtained the equipment from the United Kingdom to “bolster Iranian efforts to combat heroin smuggling across the Afghan border as part of the UN Drug Control Program.” The U.K. was extremely foolish to expect the Iranian tyrants to keep their promises not to divert the equipment to military use.

So, raccoons are killing cats in Washington somewhere:

the town meeting becoming a place to mourn and cry, the tearful cat owners who’ve seen their pets die, the frustrated wildlife officer whose life traps prove useless, the wildlife coordinator who promises to evaluate the situation and perhaps bring in trappers from the dept of agriculture, the group racoon attack on a small dog, and on and on and on.

Seriously? A 22LR would solve the problem.

Bill Hobbs says Harold Ford Jr. Is a Liar. Yes, he is. But so is Bob Corker. B-Ho knows that. If cannot tell a lie was a requirement for office, we’d have no one in office.

Well, I did pay for it. Terry takes on a tour of what your money paid for. $21,279 for carpet? Does it come with a dead hooker or something?

Marc links to the skinny on their legality.

Over at The Gun Blogs:

It was reported that the Commander of US Army Alaska has issued an order precluding his soldiers from taking advantage of Alaska’s liberal self-defense policies by forbidding the carrying of self-defensive firearms…both on and off duty.

He wants your help.

Although they likely will not protect you much. Being paper and all.

Xavier reports that:

Twenty-one soldiers in the Louisiana Army National Guard have been court martialed for looting some of the very stores they were assigned to protect during the aftermath of the hurricane Katrina.

Not sure if it’s ATF shenanigans or if there is a legitimate charge but:

A Northampton County man faces a federal firearms charge after he was identified as the original buyer of the gun used in the fatal shooting of a Reading police officer earlier this month.

Jared Tomline has been in federal custody since his arrest last week by agents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. He is scheduled for a detention hearing today at U.S. District Court in Allentown.

John Hageman, a bureau spokesman in Philadelphia, declined to specify the charge against Tomline or comment on how the .40-caliber handgun went from Tomline into the hands of Cletus Rivera, 24, the Reading man charged with killing officer Scott Wertz on Aug. 6.

Hageman said agents traced the original purchase to Tomline, and that Tomline was not involved in Wertz’s murder.

So, no charges publicly revealed. At first glance, it seems Tomline sold the gun or gave it away. It was later used in a murder. Selling the gun, of course, is not a crime. I am curious what the charges will be. This article says Tomline supplied the gun to the killer, which implies intent.

There should be something to this as the judge has stated Tomline should remain behind bars. Further:

But, prosecutors say he also has six weapons, bought within seven months, and all unaccounted for, except for the one they say Cletus Rivera used to kill Officer Scott Wertz on August 6th.

My guess is they’re going for dealer without a license. If the above statement is true, it’s a charge that will likely stick. More:

He’s charged with giving a false address last month when he bought the 40-caliber semiautomatic pistol believed to have been the one used in Officer Wertz’s murder.

That also happens to be a felony, like when Bloomberg’s investigators did it. But:

Tomline’s lawyer argues the form isn’t specific, and that Tomline did nothing wrong by giving his mailing address.

This should be an interesting one.

I’m the world’s worst about giving credit to folks when they email me stories. Sorry about that. A few reasons are:

It’s easier for me to give credit if there’s a blog link too. So, if you send me stuff, tell me if you do or do not want credit.

Sorry about that, Nimrod.

Heh:

My position is that anybody who’s in favor gun control is a fucking moron.

You’ll never guess who said it.

A piece in the ChicTrib says breed bans don’t work:

There’s an adage that says, “When a dog bites a man, it’s not news, but when a man bites a dog, it is news.” These days, dog bites don’t just lead to news, they lead to fights between neighbors, lawsuits and controversial legislation. Unfortunately, laws that ban certain breeds of dog from a community provide nothing more than the illusion of safety.

Many communities struggle with issues related to dangerous dogs. Some have responded with breed bans, yet time and again such laws have failed to solve dangerous-dog problems. Lawmakers who educate themselves and understand this issue quickly recognize that a truly effective law must address all dangerous dogs, regardless of breed.

There are many factors that contribute to a dog’s temperament, but breed bans only address one of those factors. If elected officials are comfortable with regulation of such a limited scope, then the one factor to be targeted should be the most common.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, more than 70 percent of dogs involved in biting incidents are intact (not neutered) males. No other single factor is so highly represented in dog attacks. Mandatory pet sterilization is certainly a viable option, but this can also be easily addressed without legislation, through government-subsidized spay/neuter programs and community education about proper pet care.

Yeah, we know. Meanwhile(via Tom), this week’s evil dog is the pit bull. Next week’s will be the Presa Canario:

Authorities said she was giving Xeno a bath Friday in the back yard of the upscale Coral Springs home she shared with Rivero, when the 120-pound dog attacked the 120-pound woman.

It ripped open Willey’s jugular, punctured her trachea and tore into her arms, back and side. One law enforcement official called it a “surreal scene.”

Sadly, this woman had not been a model dog owner:

In 2000, she was charged with having a dog-at-large, court records show. In 2002, she was charged with having a vicious animal without current rabies vaccination and an animal registration, records show. The next year, she was ordered to pay a $1,000 fine.

And I called this a while back. Expect more.

Those things are teeny.

Jeff:

John McCain’s views on the 2nd Amendment are poison to me. I will not vote for him. Same goes for Rudy Giuliani. Same goes for Hillary Clinton. I hold no allegience (sic) to any political party. I will vote for whomever has worked the hardest — proven by their history of voting — to preserve the 2nd Amendment, as well as all the others.

I don’t know that we gunnies will even have a good choice in 2008. Of those that are serious contenders, only Feingold seems sufficiently pro-gun (though he has favored some restrictions). It’s a shame he has his name on the Incumbent Protection Act.

What is a gun nut to do?

Meanwhile, it looks like bitter is telling us that McCain may have some pro-gun strategery up his sleeve:

I can’t say too much right now, but I thought you guys might be interested in this story about McCain hiring the former head of NRA-ILA for his presidential run.

McCain’s record on guns is a bit, err, mixed and by mixed I mean politcally expedient:

* Ban cheap guns; require safety locks; for gun show checks. (Aug 1999)
* Supports ban on certain assault weapons. (Aug 1999)
* Voted against Brady Bill & assault weapon ban. (Aug 1999)
* Guns are a problem, but so are violent web sites & videos. (Aug 1999)
* Punish criminals who abuse 2nd Amendment rights. (May 1999)
* Youth Violence Prevention Act restricts guns for kids. (May 1999)
* Repeal existing gun restrictions; penalize criminal use. (Jul 1998)
* Voted YES on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005)
* Voted YES on banning lawsuits against gun manufacturers for gun violence. (Mar 2004)
* Voted NO on background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)
* Voted YES on more penalties for gun & drug violations. (May 1999)
* Voted YES on loosening license & background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)
* Voted YES on maintaining current law: guns sold without trigger locks. (Jul 1998)

He banked on the non-existent gun show loophole once and lost. Sales at gun shows are subject to the same regulations as shop sales. Short of requiring checks on all private party transfers, I don’t see how it can be done. Maybe he learned his lesson.

It’s the plague.

Two weekends ago, Junior got sick. She had a stomach bug. And the Mrs. caught whatever she had. The Second remained happy and mostly unfazed as was I.

Last weekend, Junior got sick, the Mrs. got sick, and The Second was sick. They all had, to use the Doctor’s highly technical medical term, the sniffles. I, again, was untouched.

Yesterday, the Mrs. calls to say she’s picked up Junior from school because she has a fever and green boogies (which is parent code for contagious, if you didn’t know). While on the phone, the Mrs. sounded a bit, err, snotty. I don’t mean like snotty as in mean, I mean snotty as in she’s probably got a fever and green boogies too. And, given how things work, this probably means The Second will get it too. And Politically Incorrect Dog has an ear infection.

In all of this, I haven’t come down with anything. I think the germs realize they can’t get to me so they’re going after my family.

Nothing is more sad than a physically ill toddler. Or baby. Or dog. And The Mrs. seems more troubled by the fact she’s tired all the time from helping deal with sick kids while being sick herself. Ah, parenting. You can’t just take a break from it.

Kinda funny that a cop who had a negligent discharge may lose his job as a private security guard but may keep his job as a cop:

It “may” cost him his off duty job, but he “expects” to keep his police position. That somehow seems backwards. Shouldn’t the police have higher standards then a mall-cop?

You’d think.

And gun makers are no different.

Theres’ a blog about it:

This site is dedicated to the law-breaking, jack-booted thugs who work for parking enforcement in Arlington, VA. It is dedicated to the taxpayer-funded hypocrites who regularly break the traffic laws they are supposed to enforce.

Well, JBT reference aside, I like the concept.

BB Guns are illegal in Chicago:

Making good on warnings that BB-guns are illegal in Chicago, police have busted a Northwest Side store owner for selling one of the plastic weapons to a 13-year-old boy, authorities said Monday.

Plastic? Are they AirSoft? Banning BB guns is stupid and banning AirSoft is likely more so.

Japan is re-thinking it’s passivity:

Shinzo Abe, the front-runner to become Japan’s next prime minister, has called for revisions to the pacifist constitution imposed after World War II, saying the country must adapt to a new era.

It’s a new world but I’m fairly certain Japan has agreed to stay that way in exchange for us not nuking them.

Err, Ok.

Via Xrlq and, err, me. While the press is busy giving us wall-to-wall coverage of the Jon Benet Ramsey case, important shit is happening that we should be paying attention to:

The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that police may keep the $124,700 they seized from Emiliano Gonzolez, an immigrant who by all appearances was attempting to use the money to start a legitimate business.

This is an outrageous ruling. Consider:

Gonzolez was never charged with any crime in relation to the money, much less convicted.

Gonzalez had an explanation for the money that a lower court found both “plausible” and “consistent.” He brought several witnesses forward to corroborate his story (in the preposterous land of asset forfeiture, property can be guilty of a crime, and the burden is often person the police seized the property from to prove he obtained it legally).

The government offered no evidence to counter Gonzolez’s explanation.

Instead, the court ruled that the mere fact that Gonzolez was carrying a large sum of money, that he had difficulty understanding the officer’s questions, that he incorrectly answered some of those questions (due, Gonzolez says, to fears that if police knew he was carrying that much money, they might confiscate it — imagine that!), and that a drug dog alerted to the car Gonzolez was driving (which, as dissenting judge Donald Lay noted, was a rental, likely driven by dozens of people before Gonzolez), was enough to “convict” the money of having drug ties, even if there wasn’t enough evidence to charge Gonzolez.

Not convicted of a crime. No due process. Just a case of the you might be up to somethings. Walter Olson calls it Driving While Loaded:

A Nebraska state trooper stopped Emiliano Gomez Gonzolez for speeding on Interstate 80 in 2003 in his rental car, then proceeded to seize $124,000 from a cooler in the back seat. According to the Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (opinion, PDF), Nebraska was within its rights to seize the $124,000 as presumed drug money (it then became the subject of a federal forfeiture action) even though 1) Gonzolez had no substantial or drug-related criminal record; 2) witnesses backed up his claim that the money had been pooled by several immigrants for purposes of buying a refrigerated truck for his produce business.

Note to the press: this is the kind of gestapo shit that should be on the front page.

I love the EOTech holographic weapon sight, particularly the reticle. Tam has dubbed the reticle the donut of death. Here’s a picture of the reticle:

It is a 1 MOA dot inside a 65 MOA circle (for those not in the know, MOA is roughly one inch at a hundred yards). The dot is good for longer shots when accuracy is needed. The circle is good for rapid acquisition when MOA accuracy isn’t necessary. Also, it’s roughly the size of a man (a shorter man) at 100 yards and can be used to SWAG* a range estimate. The reticle also has posts at 12, 3, 6 and 9 which can be useful for a variety of things.

This brings us to fun with my 9mm AR-15. Since I only shoot it at the indoor range and have decided it would make a good house gun, it’s set up for short range work. I have it zeroed in at seven yards (gunnies will know what that number means). On the EOTech, at 7 yards, I put the dot on the target and that’s where the bullet goes. At 7 yards, firing as fast as I want to, it gets groups like this:

Sighting it in at such a short range has disadvantages as most sights are designed for at least 25 yards but mostly 50 to 100. This means that at further ranges, the dot isn’t that useful. So, here’s where the EOTech’s coolness comes in. At 15 yards, I simply place the target I am shooting at between the 12 0′clock hash-mark and the dot like so (X is my target):

And it works. I didn’t take pictures when at the range last but it gets groups of comparable size but slightly larger. A little bounce has more effect the further away the target is. At 25 yards, I place the target at the bottom of the top hash-mark, like so:

It works too. Your mileage may vary.

* Scientific Wild Ass Guess

Before and after.

Remember Jenny Price? The chick who made some ridiculous argument on banning handguns and was then surprised people were mean to her after that? Well, Joe wonders why the Department of Justice wants to know what bloggers are saying about her.

Komo news:

A woman wounded in last month’s deadly shooting rampage at Seattle’s Jewish Federation offices says she hopes the attack helps the public and lawmakers see a need for tighter gun control laws.

“How and why the murderer who invaded my workplace a couple of weeks ago was able to legally acquire two semiautomatic weapons in our state is still a very disturbing mystery to me,” Dayna Klein, 37, said Thursday, seated next to her husband at a news conference in a downtown hotel.

Klein said she met with former President Bill Clinton last week while in New York, discussed both gun control and workplace safety with him and was encouraged by the conversation.

“His foundation is committed to doing similar things domestically, so this will be a project that we potentially will have an opportunity to collaborate on in the future,” Klein said.

Seems to me, one CCW holder would have made a huge difference.

I’ve mentioned that in the last couple of weeks that there is a two-pronged front going on for the gun control movement. One is the assault weapons ban canard and the other is the assault on castle doctrine. Kevin spotted another case of the latter:

Intruder fatally shot

Fatality third in Escambia since ‘Stand Your Ground’ law passed

Law enforcement and attorneys say the local nurse who fatally shot an intruder at her Navy Point home Saturday would have been protected by state law before the “Stand Your Ground” law passed.

Then Kevin asks: Then why mention the “Stand Your Ground” law at all?

The answer, like the assault weapons ban canard, is association. Say “Stand your ground” in stories where people get shot enough times and people will correlate the two. The assault weapons ban canard keeps picking up some force too:

Dade cops seeing more assault rifles

More homicides in Miami-Dade have been committed this year using assault-style rifles, but whether that means more of the weapons are on the streets is unclear.

Which is it? Are they assault rifles (medium power, select fire weapons) or assault style weapons (made up)? More:

Although most killers still use handguns, police report the use of assault-style rifles — the AK-47 and its cheaper cousin, the SKS — is on the rise.

AK-47s have been banned since 1986 and heavily regulated since 1934. The SKS is neither an assault rifle, nor an assault weapon. And it’s no so much the cousin of the AK as it is the AK’s jilted ex-lover. More:

• During the first six months of the year, at least nine homicides handled by Miami-Dade detectives were believed to have been committed with assault-style rifles. That’s up from only one last year during the same time period, the department said.

• This year, the Miami Police Department’s homicide unit has handled 10 deaths attributed to assault-style rifles — including the June triple murder. That’s up from six during the same time period last year.

Uhm, is nine or 10? And is it six or one? I don’t understand what they’re saying here. Either way, those numbers hardly seem staggering.

The Broward Sheriff’s Office hasn’t detected a sharp increase, but it has noticed a ”bit of an upswing” in crimes involving shotguns and long guns over the past few months, according to BSO spokesman Elliot Cohen. He said it’s too early to draw any conclusions.

”The last couple months there has been a higher than normal level of incidence with shotguns and long guns,” Cohen said. “Anecdotally, it’s something our detectives have noticed.”

That’s what I figured.

The spate of murders comes nearly two years after legislators allowed a federal ban on certain assault-style weapons to expire — but whether that means more are on the streets is difficult to gauge, law enforcement officials say.

And there’s the blame.

I’ve noticed this trend quite a bit in the last two weeks, enough so to make me think that it is not entirely accidental.

Via Nimrod.