Bumped to top.
H/T to EveryDay, No Days Off blog for pointing out this video. They note that all homemade videos should be this good. They are right. Plus it has great music from Johnny Cash in the background. Enjoy!
UPDATE: PawPaw’s House discusses a quick mag change for the AR. In the video you can see it at about the .42 mark. From what I can see in the video, it is quick.
An Open Letter To President Obama – Investors.com
After reading this open letter to Obama by Jeffrey Howard, all I can do is say wow!
It starts off:
In today’s dangerous world, we need a president with experience, leadership and courage. Unfortunately, you have shown us little of those traits.
He concludes it by saying:
I do not resent you for your good fortune — you worked hard to become president and won the election fair and square. I do, however, despise your policies and the damage they are visiting on our nation, its economy and our future. I have dedicated my remaining years to fighting you and your policies and protecting our children’s futures.
I may well end up destroyed financially from the results of your misguided and dangerous actions — but you will never break me psychologically or crush my spirit. I am a Marine, I have a wonderful wife and family, and last but not least, I live in the greatest nation in the world. I shall work to my last breath to keep it that way, and you, sir, shall fail to destroy that dream.
Read the whole thing. It is worth a few minutes of your time.
One of the biggest beefs many people have with the mainstream media is in their self-appointed role as “gatekeepers”. In other words, they decide in the words of the New York Times what is “all the news fit to print.”
So imagine my surprise about stumbling across an article on the “South American Conference on Interdiction and Regional Security of Small Arms & Light Weapons”. The article was in the Latin American Herald Tribune out of Caracas, Venezuela. The article published an address by Ann Ganzer, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Threat Reduction, Export Controls, and Negotiations in the Department of State. She is also the Director of Conventional Arms Threat Reduction in the Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation. When I see the words “small arms”, “State Department”, and “Latin America” in one story I begin to get nervous.
The conference was August 4-6 in Buenos Aires, Argentina but the one and only report of it seems to have been from this obscure English language paper out of Venezuela. A quick Google search confirms it.
There was not anything really new in the address but it did some indications of what to expect from the Department of State regarding small arms, regional agreements, and treaties.
For example on the Arms Trade Treaty she said:
Another significant U.S. strategic step came in October 2009 when Secretary of State Clinton described a long-standing U.S. commitment to strong international standards on the international arms trade, outlining U.S. conditions for supporting an Arms Trade Treaty (ATT). In the words of Secretary Clinton “The United States is committed to actively pursuing a strong and robust treaty that contains the highest possible, legally binding standards for the international transfer of conventional weapons.” We consider the Secretary’s remarks an important first step toward a significant and meaningful international treaty.
The United States looks forward to working with others as we move toward PrepComs in 2011 and 2012, as we prepare for the start of the treaty negotiations in 2012.
On the Inter-American Convention against the Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives and other Related Materials – CIFTA – she said:
We are continuing consultations with the Senate today and seek prompt ratification. While this is pending, the U.S. is in compliance with the Convention implementing many of its commitments.
Lest we forget, CIFTA is the treaty, if approved, that could force reloaders to get a license to reload ammunition because it would be considered manufacturing. It would probably also mean the end of cover girls in the Dillon Precision Blue Press catalog.
She concluded the speech saying:
I have no doubt the security of the Americas will be significantly and positively impacted if we work together, learn from each other, and share information about interdiction, border security training, and other programs offered by members of the international community. As citizens of responsible states and fellow members of international organizations, it is incumbent upon all of us to do whatever it takes to put an end to the illicit proliferation of small arms and light weapons.
Frankly, I hope this conference ended up as your typical junket with a lot of drinking, partying, and not much really getting done. All I can say is that it is hard to keep up with these under the radar attempts at gun control. It is even harder if the mainstream media doesn’t think we need to know about it.
In other words, how to starve copyright troll RightHaven LLC out of business by refusing to have anything to do with Stephens Media websites.
I installed the Add-On in Firefox and it works just dandy. If you use Chrome, check the comments in Clayton’s post for instructions for it.
When one thinks of organizations supporting pro-gun rights litigation, immediately think of either the NRA or the Second Amendment Foundation. In California, this can be expanded to include the CalGuns Foundation and the California Rifle and Pistol Association. This explains, in part, why the case of Mishaga v. Monken which challenges Illinois’s Firearm Owner’s Identification law flew under the radar. You do not think of the Mountain States Legal Foundation which is providing legal assistance in both this case and the suit against the Nevada State Park system, Baker v. Biaggi et al.
That may well be changing. Jim Manley, the staff attorney for MSLF handling their firearms litigation, shared this in an email to me:
MSLF is committed to protecting individual rights and that commitment extends to protecting the right to keep and bear arms. To that end, MSLF filed amicus briefs in Heller and McDonald. MSLF also represents the students suing the University of Colorado to overturn that school’s concealed carry ban.
In this case, Mishaga v. Monken, the Illinois State Police are being sued by Ellen Mishaga for violating her Second and Fourteenth Amendment rights. Mrs. Mishaga is a resident of Ohio who frequently visits friends in Illinois on overnight trips. While staying in her friend’s home, she wants to be able to have a loaded firearm for self-protection. However, this would violate the Firearm Owners Identification Card Act, 430 ILCS 65/2 (10), which requires non-residents to keep their firearms unloaded and enclosed in a case. The other exceptions to the requirement to have a FOID card involve law enforcement officials, non-resident hunters, or competitors in shooting competitions – none of which apply to her. The full list can be found here.
As the suit states with regard to her Second Amendment rights:
9. The Second Amendment guarantees, inter alia, the right to possess and use firearms in a home for personal security.
10. An overnight guest has a legitimate expectation of personal security in her host’s home and an overnight guest has the same Second Amendment right to possess and use firearms that the overnight guest has in her own home.
Mrs. Mishaga twice applied for an Illinois FOID card and both times her application was rejected. The rejection was because she did not have an Illinois driver’s license or Illinois identification card. As a resident of the state of Ohio she is precluded from having either form of identification. The suit notes that “Illinois law recognizes the right of Illinois residents to keep and bear arms, Ill. Const. Art I, Sec. 22; 430 ICLS 65/1 et seq.” Therefore, the suit claims:
The right to travel, guaranteed by the privileges and immunities clauses of Article IV and the Fourteenth Amendment, is violated when a State discriminates against citizens of other States where there is no substantial reason for the discrimination beyond the mere fact that they are citizens of other States.
Specifically, with regard to Illinois:
Illinois law prohibits Ms. Mishaga from possessing a functional firearm for self-defense when she is an overnight guest in her friends’ Illinois home because she is not a resident of Illinois. 430 ILCS 65/2; 65/4; 65/14.
By prohibiting Ms. Mishaga from possessing a functional firearm, Defendant
currently maintains and actively enforces a set of laws, customs, practices, and policies under color of state law that discriminate against citizens of other States, including Ms. Mishaga, and thereby deprives Ms. Mishaga of the right to travel, in violation of the privileges and immunities clauses of Article IV and the Fourteenth Amendment.
The suit is seeking a permanent injunction against the enforcement of the FOID card requirement on out-of-state residents or, as an alternative, to process Mrs. Mishaga’s application for a FOID card. The lawsuit is filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of Illinois.
The full complaint can be found here.
While I, of course, want all the post-McDonald litigation to succeed, I especially want Mrs. Mishaga to prevail in her case. The Complementary Spouse’s mother lives on the Illinois side of the river in Metro St. Louis. Whenever we go out to visit, I must lock up and unload my firearm in Kentucky before we cross the Ohio River even though I have a concealed carry permit. If we go into St. Louis, we must travel through East St. Louis which has one of the highest crime rates in the nation. I drive through there in that gray area between being in Condition Yellow and being in Condition Orange. It is that bad.
I plan on sending a donation to MSLF. You can find out more about them here.
On Sunday, the Washington Post ran a story on Raymond Woollard who is challenging Maryland’s concealed carry law. Today, they have a story entitled “Gun-toting soccer moms a scary thought in D.C. area, but not out west”. Did someone spike the water cooler in the Post’s newsroom?
The story is well worth reading and is remarkable for its relatively non-judgmental attitude towards firearms and firearm owners.
H/T Instapundit.
An exercise regimen called parkour. Supposedly used in training by some “high-end” groups in the US military.
All I can say is that I wish I still had that level of agility. As it is, if I tried that, I’d be in physical rehab for months!
H/T to Rob Curtis, Military Times Gear Scout
From the KitUp blog at Military.com.
The Special Ops community are being told to shave the beards and ditch the khaki ballcaps with skull and crossbone patches.
Beards in a Muslim society help them blend in with the rest of the population. I wonder which politician in ACU camo came up with this rule.
Spec Ops to Say Bye Bye to Beards (Again)… | Kit Up!
Steve Gibson, founder of RightHaven LLC, must live in an another universe.
He was interviewed by Joe Mullin for the Corporate Counsel section of Law.com in an article that appeared yesterday. He seemed a bit bewildered by all the attention that his lawsuits have gathered. He goes on to say:
“It’s unbelievable,” says Gibson. “There appears to be a groundswell of interest in our business model.”
He says that like he thinks every intellectual property lawyer in the world now wants to form another RightHaven LLC to sue as many bloggers as they can find in order to become rich and famous. Earth to Steve – you aren’t considered a model but rather a pariah by most in the legal and journalism communities.
Mark Hinueber, general counsel of Stephens Media, joins Gibson in this alternate reality fantasy when he notes:
“My hope,” says Hinueber, “is we will raise awareness of copyright laws, and have more links back to our site, and have less of our material infringed on the Internet.”
While Hinueber may be correct that that they have raised awareness of copyright law, he is a fool to think that bloggers will link to the Las Vegas Review-Journal. If anything, it and the rest of the Stephens Media chain are being actively boycotted by bloggers. Less of the LVRJ’s material will be “infringed” because no one is going to touch it.
To paraphrase the Las Vegas Tourism motto – What happens in Vegas, needs to stay in Vegas.
UPDATE: TechDirt has a post with much the same response I had to the Law.com article.
An amended complaint was filed Friday, August 13th, in the NRA’s challenge to Chicago’s new gun laws. The case, Benson et al v. Chicago et al, was originally filed on July 6th. The original complaint can be found here.
So what has changed? While most of the complaint stays the same, word for word, additional plaintiffs have been added, the number of counts have been reduced, and the count against the gun list has been dropped in favor of a new emphasis against the restrictions on lawful transportation.
1. Two new plaintiffs added.
Michael Hall, Sr. of Chicago and Rick Pere of Round Lake, Illinois have been added as plaintiffs. Mr. Hall is a 52-year-old Chicago resident, married with 5 kids, a Marine veteran, hunter, and works in the telecommunications industry. The complaint notes that he often works from home and that his truck has been burglarized twice while sitting in his driveway.
Mr. Pere is self-employed as a police-firearms and security-firearms instructor. He served as a police officer in various Illinois municipalities for over 15 years. In addition, he has over 30 years of service in the U.S. Army, Illinois Army National Guard, and the U.S. Air Force Reserves. He has also served as a military contractor in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Haiti. He wants to be able to open a shooting range in Chicago where he could offer firearms training instruction as well as sell firearms.
2. Stylistic Changes
The amended complaint still retains most of the original complaint word for word. It has updated the references to the McDonald decision to include the actual Supreme Court citation instead of the slip opinion.
Stylistically, it has tightened up some of the language and clarified other things. One major change is to include the race of the plaintiffs living in the City of Chicago. While this does serve to illustrate the racial diversity of the plaintiffs, it feels cumbersome. Unless I am missing something, I think illustrating the racial diversity of the plaintiffs could have been done just as well, if not better, by the use of press releases and having the plaintiffs available for media interviews.
3. Consolidated Number of Counts
The original complaint as filed had eight counts. This number has been reduced to five in the amended complaint. Counts II, VI, and VII were dropped in their entirety. The old Count II challenged the age restrictions in the Chicago. Count VI challenged the “unsafe handgun” portion of the ordinance. Finally, Count VII challenged the banning of laser sight accessories.
4. Dropped challenges to age restriction, unsafe handgun list, and laser sights.
The amended complaint dropped all challenges to the age 21 restriction to obtain a Chicago Firearm Permit (CFP). As currently written, the ordinance does allow those between the ages of 18 and 21 to obtain a CFP if they have written permission of a parent or legal guardian and the parent or guardian is not prohibited by obtaining either a CFP or an Illinois FOID card. I am speculating that dropping this challenge may have been because under Federal law one must be 21 to purchase a handgun from a dealer.
Likewise, the challenges to both the unsafe handgun list and laser sights were dropped in the amended complaint. Given that some states like California and Massachusetts have approved handgun lists, the decision may have been made to wait to challenge this part of the ordinance. The California handgun list is currently by challenged in the case of Pena v. Cid. That case has been stayed pending the outcome of the 9th Circuit’s decision in Nordyke v. King. I don’t know why the laser sight and accessory complaint was dropped except that it was a minor part of the original complaint.
5. New emphasis on lawful transportation.
While the original complaint did mention the ability to transport a firearm from one location to another – lawful transportation – the emphasis on this was lost in the mix. The amended complaint puts new emphasis on this and mentions it specifically in their request for a declaratory judgment and for injunctive relief against the new ordinance. In the descriptive part of the complaint, more verbiage has been added to describe the plaintiff’s desire to “transport” firearms between Chicago and other locations outside of the city.
There is also an added emphasis on the one working gun per CFP per household requirement along with the restrictions on the definition of “home” being within the four walls. The complaint mentions that Mr. Hall wants to be able to provide self-defense for all of his property and not just within the home. Moreover, the complaint goes into detail on the risk a homeowner faces from a home invasion and argues that the one working gun provision increases the risk.
I have embedded the amended complaint below:
Benson et al v. Chicago et al – Amended Complaint
by