Creekside Firing Range is a range in the Atlanta area. Some people built houses near the range and are surprised that ranges are noisy (note: if sound suppressors weren’t so heavily regulated, this wouldn’t be a problem). So, they try to shut it down. They lose. They do the logical thing and vandalize and destroy property.
That shotgun looks suspiciously unlike a shotgun. They usually calls those AK-47s so I guess it’s an improvement.
Of course none were fired. It was a toy gun. Princeton loses its collective shit because some juveniles found a toy gun.
Also, TN law says passengers can drink. Popular college football will do that to you.
specific gun control measures proposed in their aftermath were largely irrelevant and almost certainly could not have prevented the incidents or reduced their death tolls.
Well, yeah. Usually they take a bandaid approach. Gun control: what you do instead of something.
We expect it from anti-gun bloggers. And anti-gunners. So, no surprise when the anti-gun crybabies bar folks from their press conference, after all you can’t have facts getting in the way of opinion when your entire ideology is centered on misleading people. But when state senators from NY refuse to hear the other side, that’s a special kind of wrong.
The Daily Show weighs in on people buying guns since the Obama ascension:
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | M – Th 11p / 10c | |||
| Money Shot | ||||
|
||||
Proves the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Ownership has no sense of humor. And they had the guy from Impact Guns on there. Funny and worth watching.
Update: Found embeddable video.
A pretty girl and a suppressed MK 12
I think the point is it makes the weapon look cool. I would have to look cool since it is a big unwieldy thing.
House votes to override the veto of the guns in restaurants that serve alcohol bill: 69-27
Update: WizardPC emails:
Naifeh is the first recognized. “there are so many organizations opposed to this legislation that we should listen to them.” Veto must be upheld…Hospitality Association wines about having to post signs because that will make them “have to choose between which groups they will alienate.” He went on to quote some appointed LEOs saying they would be skeered of going to restaurants with their grandchildren if this veto is overridden. “WHO IS GOING TO ENFORCE THIS!!!” referring to the provision that HCPers can’t drink. Quotes a preacher saying “the relegious right” is against it. Hookay.
Casada is next. As it stands now, the bad guys are ignoring the law. TN is one of the unsafest in the nation. Nashville and Memphis are pretty violent, too. 36 other states allow this, and they’re safer.
Hardaway comes up. “I’m not going to editorialize.” Proceeds to read editorials. “This is about ‘How do we increase public safety'” and this isnt the way to do it. “This protects law abiding citizens from themselves.” Advocates a gun offender registry. Goes off on other tangents that have nothing to do with this veto override, like “social and public health issues” surrounding gun violence. Suggests addressing “underlying behavior.” Quotes TN Hospitality Association as suggesting their members contact the legislature (I wonder if the person who sent that email was the THA’s registered lobbyist…) Calls for mental health review of carry permit holders. Quotes Larry Godwin as saying “I think you’re going to see the results of this fairly quickly.” Says Godwin took 8 police commanders with him to the veto ceremony. “Nothing more volatile than having a weapon (where alcohol is served).” Common sense is dead. LEOs all say this is dangerous.
Speaker says we can talk for 10 hours on this, and no one is going to change their minds. “to rehash the same arguments over and over is ridiculous…If you’re here to showboat, you’re in the wrong place.” Met with applause đŸ˜€
Rep Todd brings up some LEOs to the podium, points out that Hardaway is full of crap. “This bill protects the citizens of this state.”
Blake points out we gained 3 votes. Heh.
Tomorrow, the senate.
Update: Campfield gloats.
Jeff Woods, in a surprise move, does not soil himself and brings the truth:
So with his veto, our powerfully influential governor managed to chase away three lawmakers who had been on his side.
I hear it’s starting.
WizardPC emails:
HB898 passed, 89-6, but not before Rep Campfield asked the sponsor if he had been contacted by Serpas or Bredesen. Sponsor responded in the negative, with a big ole smile.
After posing the question, Rep Mike Turner suggested that Campfield better not speed in this county after questioning Serpas’ motivations. Turner, the Democratic Caucus Chairman, likes to snark on the floor.
Rep Bass stated that this bill would bring off-duty officers in line with Carry Permit Holders in regard to restrictions on carry in restaurants that serve alcohol. It sounds like this was voted on under the assumption that the veto on 962 would be overridden.
update: More from Rep. Campfield:
Today HB898 by Watson allowed police officers and former police officers to carry in places that serve alcohol when off duty. Police officers don’t necessarily have a carry permit. They often times have POST certification. We will see if Bredesen really believes “Guns and alcohol don’t mix” if he vetos the bill to be consistant. I am ready for chief Cerpas to come out strongly against this legislation if he really believes what he says.
Under the proposed bills, a handgun carry permit holder still cannot drink alcohol when carrying. But HB0898 would allow police to carry their weapon while in places that serve alcohol. Via WizardPC who emails:
I was watching for the veto, and was surprised to learn about HB898, which removes the prohibition on off duty law enforcement carrying firearms in establishments that serve alcohol.
I’m sure that Gov Bredesen and Chief Serpas are vehemently opposed to this legislation, since guns and alcohol never mix.
Also, Rep Kelsey can be heard saying to the sponsor, “You and your special classes of people…”
Like you and me, only better.
Claims .50 calibers are unusual and dangerous. And assault weapons” have “such a high rate of fire and capacity for firepower that it’s function as a legitimate sports or recreational firearm is substantially outweighed by the danger that it can be used to kill and injure human beings. Of course, all weapons are dangerous but neither of these are unusual. They also mention Second Amendment right does not protect possession of a military M-16 rifle. I find that odd, in light of Miller’s differentiation about a weapon being a part of the ordinary military equipment. And, of course, the transfer of new M-16s is illegal. But possession of weapons that look like assault weapons is pretty far from unusual.
More here.
ETA: d’oh. A state court.
Via Redneckin, comes word of a man whose vintage airplane was confiscated for failing to fill out ATF forms.
The Rep. says Veto gets smacked down in the morning. Well, we’ll see.
Georgia has more places off limits to bearing arms than California
But in Cali, only the rich and well-connected can go armed. Continuing:
Prior to July of 2008, the members of GeorgiaCarry.Org, Inc. contended that Georgia had more places off limits to the bearing of arms than any state in the nation. Now, in 2009, Georgia still has more places off limits than California. Most people assume California is highly restrictive of the right to bear arms and that Georgia is a “gun friendly state.” Are these twin assumptions justified?
Terry Frank: Serpas is the chief who cites as his proof of “danger” old western movies.
* link.
A pharmacist in OK is accused of murder. In lieu of payment to his lawyer, he gave his lawyer his guns. It’s a fairly common practice for folks with large collections of weapons who maybe going to trial to place weapons in their lawyer’s custody to avoid confiscation of them. The lawyer can, then, lawfully sell them or retain them until the trial is over, unless the weapons were involved in the crime, of course. So, this doesn’t seem that unusual.
But the judge asked, as part of the bail, that the defendant relinquish all weapons. When asked where they were, he said he gave them to his lawyer. The judge wanted a list and the lawyer said no because that information could be used against his client. And, I’m sure, the prosecutor would happily point out to a jury how many weapons this gun nut owned, as though that were a bad thing. The judge was not amused and threatened to put the guy back in jail for not answering. Judge was reminded of that whole fifth amendment and finally said uncle. But says, in the future, she will not allow lawyers to accept weapons as payment. Really? Seems to me the contract between two people isn’t her concern.
More here.
Dave Hoffman implies the alleged crime gun was among them. I’m pretty sure that gun is in police custody somewhere.
Via reader JKB, who posits:
My wonder is, if you can’t let your attorney take possession of your weapons and if you turn them over to the local police they are likely to not be returned regardless of the outcome of the proceedings, what is permitted and how do you prevent the court ordered surrender from prejudicing your defense?
I did not know that: Tennessee has the 2nd highest violent crime rate in the nation
Clearly, it’s due to those guns in bars. Oh, wait.
Did you know that back in 2006, Governor Bredesen said in a survey that he would sign the bill to allow those with carry permits to carry in places that serve alcohol provided they were not drinking? Broken promises.
Via David, who notes what I’ve said all along:
There is a lot of confusion over what the bill would do, and much of that is intentional. Opponents want to portray it as an invitation for drunken maniacs to open fire in saloons. Proponents point out that many family restaurants serve beer and wine, and those dining there should not have their defenselessness dictated to them by a state that has neither the capability nor the legal obligation to protect them.
The Commercial Squeal is squealing that you should call your reps and tell them not to override.
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
