Turns out a lot of gun locks can be opened with little or no force using common hand tools like pliers and screwdrivers. I love how the article is no different than all the ones about how bic pens can open bike locks. It even includes a video of an 11-year-old boy opening various locks with an awl. At any rate, trigger locks won’t deter thieves. They’re really only meant to keep kids from shooting their siblings. If they don’t even do that, I’m not sure they’re worth much.

New York is about to legalize medical marijuana. I’m told the bill was supported by the optometry lobby.

He addresses the distortions about ATF trace data:

U.S. Representative Todd Tiahrt (R-Goddard) today blasted the organization behind a comprehensive campaign aimed at repealing current law that prohibits public release of critical data related to ongoing criminal investigations. In addition to a full page ad in USA Today last week, Internet ads and a series of television ads, Mayors Against Illegal Guns has now hired someone to drive a truck up and down busy streets in Wichita falsely claiming the so-called Tiahrt Amendment “puts police at risk.”

“I am no longer surprised with the outrageous claims made by this group,” said Tiahrt. “It is unfortunate that a few media outlets and advertising companies are actually willing to publicly disseminate this misleading and blatantly false propaganda.”

At issue is a campaign urging repeal of the Tiahrt Amendment, which prohibits the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) from releasing gun trace data to the public. The ATF gun trace database contains investigation-specific information and is made available to law enforcement agencies and prosecutors for criminal investigations. The ATF and the Fraternal Order of Police (FOP), the nation’s largest law enforcement organization, support the Tiahrt Amendment and have requested its reauthorization every year since 2003. Both organizations claim repeal of the Tiahrt Amendment would jeopardize ongoing criminal investigations and risk the lives of undercover law enforcement officers.

The organization Mayors Against Illegal Guns is behind the Tiahrt repeal campaign. The group claims to have the support of numerous police chiefs across the country, which is also misleading according to National FOP President Chuck Canterbury.

Meanwhile, the press takes dictation from the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Ownership. The Tiahrt amendment is supported by the ATF and the FOP.

In TN, a constitutional amendment protecting the right to hunt has passed the house:

The Tennessee House has unanimously passed a measure to amend the Tennessee Constitution to further protect the rights of hunters and fishermen.

House Joint Resolution 108 reads, “The citizens of this state have a right to hunt, fish, and harvest game and fish, subject to regulations and restrictions authorized by this constitution and prescribed by law. When reviewing such regulations and restrictions, a state court shall utilize a rational basis standard, as the standard has been defined by state courts through case law. This section shall not be construed to abrogate any private property rights, the state’s sovereignty over game and fish, or regulation of commercial activities.”

Because The Right to Keep and Bear Sporting Goods isn’t mentioned in the constitution.

A news report on the unethical standards for NBC’s To Catch A Predator.

Well, when the media goes from reporting news to making news, you can expect issues.

So, here’s the post on the new National Instant Check System (NICS) bill. The NICS is the database that is used to determine if the purchaser of a firearm is a prohibited person. As I said before, the measure seems to offer incentives in the form of grants to states that keep their NICS data up to date. That is, the bill largely serves as a means to pay for things that are already law. Conversely, states that do not can lose law enforcement grants from the feds. In short, I’m rather unconcerned about the whole thing.

David Hardy has the some of the text from the bill. He notes that:

Most of the bill is 20+ pages of verbiage about grants to states to improve input of mental health records. For me, the critical language is a couple of sections that essentially let a person who was committed at some point in their lives escape the lifetime bar that now exists. The wording is a trifle awkward at times, but as I read it, if the court that committed them makes a finding that they are not a danger any more, or the state creates an entity that can make a similar finding, they’re not a prohibited person and their name comes off the NICS list.

Allowing those who have their rights revoked an opportunity to have their rights restored is a good thing. It seems there is no remedy for relief for other minor infractions (like say a non-violent felony conviction). That has been part of the law but has never been funded by the congress. Some states have provisions for the restoration of rights but they seem at odds with the feds over that. The policy of the ATF has been to follow state law, unless said former prohibited person crosses state lines. However, I will make the prediction that this portion of the law will never be funded. Why do I make that prediction? Because that’s been the case since the the Brady Law authorized the same thing.

GOA opposes the bill.

The bill should clarify the term adjudicated mentally defective, but I’ve seen no evidence that it does. Currently, ATF policy defines that term rather broadly. I think the bill should clarify that term as open-ended definitions lead to policy issues.

The NRA’s Wayne LaPierre says unequivocally that this is not a gun gun control bill and that efforts to make it so will be opposed by the NRA. Says Wayne:

There’s been a lot of confusion and questions surrounding NRA’s position on a NICS improvement bill that’s being written in Congress. Part of the confusion comes from the fact that the anti-gun media is portraying this as a “gun-control” bill. Let me make it clear: It’s not.

The NICS bill, as written, wouldn’t expand the definition of a prohibited person. It wouldn’t disqualify anyone currently able to legally purchase a firearm. In fact, it would provide an opportunity for people who’ve been disqualified to clear their name. Right now, folks don’t have that ability. Gun owners lose nothing in the bill as it’s currently written, and in fact the bill improves the system for those who’ve been caught in the bureaucratic red tape.

So why is this being called a gun-control bill? In part because one of the bill’s authors is anti-gun Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy. It’s easy to call any piece of legislation from McCarthy anti-gun, even if it’s not. But the biggest reason the media’s calling this “gun-control” is because they’re desperate to report on a gun-control victory in Congress.

Which is basically what I said about it. Sebastian breaks it down further. He says it clarifies the definition of adjudicated mentally defective, however, I have not seen that language.

Also, the bill status is here.

In terms of the political game being played here, the NRA snubbed Carolyn McCarthy according to the WaPo. Then, it seems the Dems snubbed the NRA by allowing her to be a sponsor. Not really relevant, but it’s some inside baseball that may be important later.

In other news, the astroturf organization funded by the Joyce Foundation got their marching orders wrong. Seems they were, at first, unhappy with the bill. Then, the post got pulled. But Google is forever. It’s quite amusing to read. They were full of sound and fury (signifying nothing, of course) and then pulled it. I’m assuming the purchasers of the astroturf said hey, it looks like gun control so shut up. Life must be hard if you’re a paid shill.

For posterity’s sake, some of Gonzo’s real boners are below the fold:

Read the rest of this entry »

TN Rep. Curry Todd (who seems to have a last name for a first name and a first name for a last name):

Although it seems to have been clouded by other issues, the General Assembly once again faced several pieces of gun legislation this year.

Because I have a past in law enforcement, I am very much in favor of the Second Amendment, and usually have a hand in much of this legislation.

This year, I sponsored House Bill 411, which has been more commonly referred to as the “Castle Doctrine.” We did pass a version of this, expanding the circumstances under which the use of force is presumed justified. I felt this measure was vitally important; our citizens should be able to defend themselves.

He also notes some gun stats:

The facts show that in countries where gun control laws increase, so too do the crimes that those laws attempt to prevent. For example, according to the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, in Luxemburg, where handguns are totally banned, the murder rate is nine times higher than in Germany, which has one of the highest rates of gun ownership in Europe. Although Russia has one of the lowest rates of gun ownership in the world, between 1998 and 2004 Russian murder rates were quadruple American rates.

They always shoot the dog:

This whole area strikes me as a perfect scenario for a law school question. Under what circumstances do the police have a right to shoot dogs? Obviously, they’ll always say that the dogs were attacking, but if the police have invaded private property without a warrant, and the owner of the dogs is given no notice that they were there, how is the dog supposed to know that they were “good guys” and not the bad guys it is their job to protect against? Nothing is more dangerous than police in hot pursuit or police acting under a mistake, as unlike criminals, they’re acting under legal authority, and if you don’t know they are there, anything might happen.

There’s a lot more.

He has some PVC pipe and spuds!

Tales of the Gun on DVD.

Update: I linked because I thought it was cool. Now, A&E is offering me compensation for the link. Full disclosure, and all of that. So, if you buy something, I may benefit. But that’s not why I linked it. I really dig the show.

Update 2: Nevermind, I’d have to sign up for an ad network and all of that. Still, it’s a cool show which is why I linked in the first place.

A video.

Irony.

No, you can’t has a fucking cheezburger, urz a goddamn cat.

Please stop emailing me, linking, or generally mentioning this lolcatz crap.

Thank you.

Update: heh.

The fourth circuit has ruled the feds can’t go holding people indefinitely without charging them. Good.

Via Sebastian, some hoplophobic mom is all spooked because her ex wants to teach her son to shoot. Now, here’s the deal: I don’t advocate getting everyone out to shoot. And I don’t advocate forcing people to. And I don’t advocate dragging hysterical pant-shitters to the range. But I do advocate education. Now, the kid doesn’t want to shoot (at least, that’s what mom tells us – I don’t know of many young boys that don’t want to watch stuff go boom!) and that is fine. But acting like firearms are some mythical beastie that should be avoided like uranium is not healthy. If nothing else, such an exercise would teach the kid how to safely secure a weapon. And what to do if he comes into contact with one.

That said, I have some close friends who will not have a gun in the house. Well, more to the point, the woman of the family is the hysterical kind about guns, which means the rest are. But even they have asked that I take their children shooting so that they learn gun safety as they know (this being rural Tennessee) that eventually the kids will probably be in close proximity to a weapon. Teach them what to do because ignorance kills. More importantly, the exercise would likely teach him not to be hysterical about guns, which is probably the mom’s real fear.

Update: Pissed Off Housewife has more. So does Ahab.

Informational packets for reporters covering gun issues.

Some think the ATF is expanding the definition a little too broadly.

49% don’t favor additional gun controls. 43% do. And:

In answer to the question, “Will stricter gun control laws increase or reduce violent crime?”, 40% said it would have no effect at all, 16% said it would increase violent crime (only the criminals are armed. . .) and 37% said it would decrease crime.

We heard the stories about rampant gun confiscations in the aftermath of hurricane Katrina. Now, a suit alleges:

For nearly two years, pet owners from the low-lying Louisiana parish of St. Bernard have accused sheriff’s deputies of having wantonly killed dozens of dogs they forced evacuees to leave behind during Hurricane Katrina in 2005, without regard to the dogs’ size or the potential threat they might pose.

One owner said her family was forced at gunpoint to leave its dog behind. Another owner said residents became frantic when, they said, they overheard one deputy claim that “once everybody’s gone, we’re going to have target practice tonight.” They claim in court papers that deputies were under ” authorization…of their superiors and employers.

Two deputies have already been indicted by a grand jury in New Orleans on charges of felony, aggravated cruelty to animals. The Louisiana attorney general’s office is investigating and this morning lawyers for a group of owners will file a comprehensive complaint in federal court in Louisiana seeking class action status for their clients.

When the shit hits the fan, the law should act like the law and not a bunch of goons.

A loss for property rights in Tennessee:

Governor Bredesen on Monday signed into law a measure to extinguish most workplace smoking in Tennessee.

The law will go into effect in July, but the ban will not be enforced until October to give businesses time to comply. The ban would apply to most businesses, including restaurants.

Exclusions include bars or restaurants that prohibit people under 21 years old at all times, businesses employing no more than three workers and retail tobacco stores.

The market has pretty much instituted the same rules and has done a fine job regulating smoking. Where do they allow smoking in Tennessee other than bars? But someone who owns a business should decide what otherwise lawful activities they allow in that business. We don’t need big brother making those decisions.

Additionally, it looks the state can now build toll roads:

A bill to allow the state to build its first modern toll roads passed the state Senate today by a 20-10 vote.

The Tennessee Department of Transportation would be authorized to develop two pilot toll road projects — one road project and one bridge project — under the legislation. The House is scheduled to vote on the bill during its session at 5 p.m. today.

So, in years of record surpluses, our congress monkeys decide to allow the state to build toll roads. And, of course, the increase in cigarette taxes also corresponds to record surpluses. When there’s a shortfall, they need to tax. When there’s a surplus, they need to tax.

To my fellow Tennesseans: vote every one of these morons out.

What not to do.

If you comment here, you do too:

The Tyler native added to his resume last month when he won the Texas State Rifle Association’s High Power Rifle Championship at Camp Swift near Elgin, during a two-day competition.

Well, that could explain it. I await verification but I thought the truck driver looked familiar. Kinda doubtful that all those folks would be in it together.

From Slate:

Scientists may have figured out how to make stem cells without embryos.

Old trick: Put a nucleus from a skin cell into a gutted human egg, and let the egg’s processes turn it into an embryo, thereby producing embryonic stem cells (ESCs).

New trick: Identify the relevant processes and apply them directly to the cell, turning it into an ESC with no egg or embryo required. Pro-lifers approve the new method.

Remaining hurdles:

1. We’ve only done this in mice; it might be harder in humans.
2. We did it with viral genetic engineering; we need to find a safer method.
3. Some of the genes that worked also caused cancer in many of the mice; we need to find other genes.

Optimistic view: We’ll solve all these problems and fulfill the promise of stem-cell therapy.

Realistic view: We don’t need to solve the safety problems to achieve what stem cells are really about: facilitating disease research.

While I never saw anything wrong with harvesting embryos for stem cells, now that a good alternative appears promising, we should probably stop doing it. After all, it would be great if the social harm caused by abortion opponents didn’t spill over into curing diseases.

The law-abiding obey the law. Even at gun shows.

Don’t you hate when your tactical Tupperware jams?

A hypothetical situation: two men who have not seen each other in a while finally decide to get together for a beer. One dude shows up at the other dude’s house. Here’s an actual conversation they might have.

Dude 1: Hey, man, what’s up?

Dude 2: Aah, not much. You?

Dude 1: Same old, same old. New TeeVee?

Dude 2: Yeah, wanna beer?

Dude 1: Sure, man.

They proceed to watch the game. To you women readers (both of you) that’s all you see. But to men, what they really said was this:

Dude 1: I understand you’ve been having a hard time lately and I’ve come to check in on you and make sure you’re OK.

Dude 2: Yeah, the new job might be more than I can handle. I think I may have overextended myself financially. Me and the significant other aren’t quite getting along like we used to. The IRS is kicking my ass. If this deal doesn’t go through, I might be screwed. I feel a bit depressed and I’m hoping that you can provide me with some advice and companionship to get me through this tough time. And I think my house has termites. What significant things are going on in your life?

Dude 1: Stressed out about raising kids. Feeling the effects of middle age. I’m kinda tired all the time. Marriage ain’t what it used to be with constant activities involving kids. I really need some more me time and alone time with my wife. I need to start working out and taking better care of myself because I want to be there for my kids when they’re older. And I should probably have this twinge checked out but I hate doctors and I hate bad news from them more. So, in the fine tradition of men, I’ll just ignore it. And, given your financial troubles, you bought a new TeeVee?

Dude 2: Yeah, not smart. But I needed something to take my mind off of things. And I appreciate you coming by and showing concern for my general well-being during this tough time. And I’m here for you.

Dude 1: You know I’ll always be there for you, in that non gay way, of course.

With men, less is more.

Yes, I know it’s broken. No, I can’t do anything about it. Some blogs don’t get picked up for some reason and some counts of inbound links don’t work right.

Here.

Well, I guess they needed dessert.