Month: May 2012

Uncategorized

A Disturbance In The Force

May 25, 2012 by 1 Comment

To paraphrase Darth Vader, “I detect a disturbance in the gun blogger force.”

That disturbance in the force is because Frank W. James – Farmer Frank – of Corn, Beans, Spent Brass, An Empty Page and A Deadline has decided to hang it up after four years. The frustrations he felt with the constraints of Blogger and some of their new “features” was too much for him. He made the announcement on Tuesday in his final post.

I’ve never made a dime off this blog, so by my father’s estimation it has had zero commercial value and my time was wasted……UNLESS I enjoyed it.

And I did for a long time, for over 4 years in fact, but due to the changes being made in the software that Blogger is now putting forth, I no longer enjoy it. In fact, this damn thing has become work.

Work that has zero value because Dad was right, I’m not getting paid anything for it, so it has had no value.

The alternatives in my view are worse because in just about all the acceptable (to me in terms of usage rules) cases I will have to spend money to do this nonsense which means by Dad’s reasoning my ‘work’ would have less than ‘zero’ value. It would have a negative value solely for ‘vanity’ purposes. That’s pretty lame and it’s not going to happen.

So, after approximately 480,000 visits and 626,000 page views over just 4 years of duration, this blog experiment has come to an end.

I’m glad I got to meet Frank at the recent NRA Annual Meeting. I know I will miss his blog. He promises to do guest blogging in the future for movie and book reviews. I plan to take him up on that offer as I am sure will a number of other bloggers.

It is a damn shame that in the effort to make things “better”, technology companies often ruin a decent product. I still can do more with MS Word 2003 than their 2007 version, I’m still not enamored with the Facebook timeline, and, like Frank, I don’t really care for the “new” version of Blogger. As my grandma used to muse, “Such as life.”

Uncategorized

NRA-ILA’s John Frazier Fisks Car Deaths Vs. Gun Deaths Report

May 25, 2012 by

John Frazer, NRA-ILA Director of Research & Information, spoke with Cam Edwards yesterday about the report from the Violence Policy Center that purported that “gun deaths” outnumbered those from motor vehicle in some ten states. He notes that accidental deaths are at a low which was not reported.

As to the non-critical reports in many media outlets around the country, he suggests pointing out the fallacies in the report in letters to the editor or comments on the site.

Uncategorized

Update On Attempt To Negate Bateman Win

May 24, 2012 by

Grass Roots North Carolina sent out an update this evening regarding the NC Senate Judiciary I committee substitute for HB 489. The proposed language of this substitute would effectively negate the win that Alan Gura secured in Bateman v. Perdue.

The substitute has been pulled from the calendar to give the Judiciary I committee “more time to study the issue.” As to why it was even proposed, GRNC speculates that it was legislative staff run amok.

What is becoming clearer, however, is that this might be a case of inadequately supervised staffers running amok. When emergency management bill HB 843 went to the Senate Judiciary I Committee, it still contained the language found unconstitutional in Bateman. Committee chair Sen. Pete Brunstetter then reportedly gave it to staff to “fix.” But instead of simply repealing the now-unconstitutional gun ban, they apparently took it upon themselves to draft new gun bans. Equally clear is that although HB 489 was Rep. “Skip” Stam’s bill, Stam wasn’t even informed that his bill would be gutted before it was attempted.

What remains to be seen is whether Brunstetter and other Republicans will do the right thing and simply repeal the old ban. Right now, too many are still making noises about using gun bans to combat looting during natural or manmade disasters – once again falling for the old trap of targeting lawful guns instead of unlawful behavior.

GRNC is now asking that people contact their state senator (as opposed to the committee members) and make their displeasure known. You can find out your state senator (if you don’t already know) by going to this link and putting in your ZIP+4. If you don’t know your ZIP+4, you can find it on your driver’s license or most any piece of mail coming to your home.

The suggested letter composed by GRNC reads:

Dear Senator:

I strongly urge you to oppose the Proposed Committee Substitute for House Bill 489: “Dangerous Weapons Restrictions in Emergencies” (H489-CSSA-71 [v.4]). The bill would be more accurately titled: “Gun Rights Authorized by Bureaucrats.”

North Carolina’s existing ban on bearing arms outside the home was recently declared unconstitutional under the Second Amendment by a federal court in the case Bateman v. Perdue. But instead of simply repealing what is now a largely unenforceable statute, HB 489 would replace it with an even more insidious ban.

That HB 489’s long title describes “authorizing” arms and ammunition in the home speaks volumes about the bill. Language purporting to restrict cities from banning guns outside the home is vague to the point of being useless; the bill is sloppily drafted; and worst of all, it stipulates for the first time which lawful firearm-related activities I may or may not exercise IN MY OWN HOME.

Understand that I will accept NO NEW GUN BANS, but only the repeal of the state of emergency gun ban found unconstitutional in Bateman.

Please advise me of your position on this issue. I will be monitoring it via Grass Roots North Carolina legislative alerts.

Respectfully,

This is too important an issue to just let other people do it. If you live in North Carolina and you value your gun rights, get off your duff, copy and paste this message into an email, and send it.

Uncategorized

Expect A Coordinated Campaign

May 23, 2012 by

The Violence Policy Center report that compared “gun deaths” with deaths by motor vehicle is, as I pointed out yesterday, misleading. However, that hasn’t stopped their friends in the media and the gun control community along with gullible local media from picking up the story.

A quick Google search shows a slew of stories on the report especially from the ten states where so-called gun deaths exceed deaths by motor vehicles. Most of the local media reporting about it do not have the time nor the smarts to question it. They just report it as the gospel truth because it is coming from an organization that is supposedly dedicated to studying violence.

Then you have stories like the one by Brian Dickerson of the Detroit Free Press. Mr. Dickerson is the Editorial Page Editor. While he should know better I don’t think he wants to delve into the numbers. He’d rather use it to push his agenda.

But don’t expect the from-my-cold-dead-hands crowd to embrace the center’s conclusion that the disparity has everything to do with federal regulation — extensive and wildly successful in the case of motor vehicles, and virtually non-existent in the case of firearms.

Like I said, expect a coordinated campaign of puffball stories along with tut-tutting editorials and earnest letters to the editors about how we have to do something.

Uncategorized

There Is Research And Then There Is Junk Research

May 23, 2012 by 4 Comments

The Violence Policy Center released a report today that analyzed and compared firearm and motor vehicle related deaths for the year 2009 on a state-by-state basis. They found that in ten states firearm related deaths outnumbered  deaths caused by motor vehicles. These states are Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Indiana, Michigan, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Virginia, and Washington

VPC Legislative Director Kristen Rand states, “Americans are reaping the benefits of smart safety regulation of motor vehicles. The idea that gun deaths exceed motor vehicle deaths in 10 states is stunning when one considers that 90 percent of American households own a car while fewer than a third own firearms. It is also important to consider that motor vehicles–unlike guns–are essential to the functioning of the entire U.S. economy. It is time to end firearms’ status as the last unregulated consumer product.”

As a result of their study, the Violence Policy Center has proposed a number of regulations, bans, restrictions, and enforcement actions.

Comprehensive regulation of the firearms industry and its products could include: minimum safety standards (i.e., specific design standards and the requirement of safety devices); bans on certain types of firearms such as “junk guns” and military-style assault weapons; limits on firepower; restrictions on gun possession by those convicted of a violent misdemeanor; heightened restrictions on the carrying of loaded guns in public; improved enforcement of current laws restricting gun possession by persons with histories of domestic violence; more detailed and timely data collection on gun production, sales, use in crime, involvement in injury and death; and, public education about the extreme risks associated with exposure to firearms.

America is reaping the benefits of decades of successful injury prevention strategies on its highways, but continues to pay an unacceptable, yet equally preventable, price in lives lost every year to gun violence.

There is only one little problem with their study and recommendations. They have aggregated all deaths from the use of a firearm – homicides, legal interventions (police shootings), suicides, and accidents – into what they call gun violence. In each of the ten states listed, suicides comprise the vast majority of firearm-related deaths. Homicides and legal interventions comprise only a fraction of the firearms-related deaths. This ranges from a low of 14% in Utah to a high of 46% in Michigan.

If you look at their recommendations, they do nothing to reduce suicide. Does it really matter to a person who is intent on committing suicide that they can’t use “junk” guns (sic) or a “assault  weapon” (sic) or that there are restrictions on concealed carry? We all know the answer is an unequivocal no.

Suicide is a sad thing. It is painful for those left behind who are left wondering why. It is hard on the law enforcement, EMT, and medical personnel who have to deal with the aftermath. And it is extremely sad that someone has given up all hope of living and decided to take their own life.

If the Violence Policy Center really wanted to propose something useful, they would push for more suicide hotlines. They would advocate for putting mental health treatment on par with other healthcare and not have it treated as a second class illness. They would conduct research into the root causes of suicide.

If VPC really wanted to look at the numbers, it would find that there were more suicides – 36,909 – than deaths from motor vehicles and only about half of those were committed with a firearm. Moreover, deaths from suffocation (hanging) and poisoning outnumbered homicides by almost 4,000 deaths.

VPC doesn’t really want to propose useful solutions nor do they really want to look at the numbers. They do junk research to promote their gun prohibitionist agenda and to continue getting money from the deep pockets of organizations like the Joyce Foundation. It is actually rather pathetic.

UPDATE: Sebastian has more on just how dependent VPC has become on that grant money. Support from donations now comprise less than 20% of their total revenues and you can guess where they get the rest of the money. Moreover, 55% of their budget goes to support the salaries of just Josh Sugarmann and Kristen Rand.

Uncategorized

Winchester Reintroduces The Model 70 Alaskan

May 21, 2012 by 3 Comments

The Winchester Model 70 Alaskan is being reintroduced to the Winchester line of bolt action rifles. Now made by FNH-USA down in Columbia, South Carolina, it will be available in .30-06, .300 Win Mag, and .338 Win Mag.

It will feature one of the things that made pre-’64 Model 70s the “Rifleman’s Rifle” – controlled round feed with a Mauser-type claw extractor.

From the press release:

For big game hunting in Alaska or anywhere else in the world, the new Winchester Repeating Arms Model 70 Alaskan comes back with all the features that have made the Model 70 a favorite among big game hunters. The Model 70 Alaskan will be available in three calibers 30-06 Sprg, 300 Win Mag and 338 Win Mag.

The Satin finish Monte Carlo walnut stock gives the gun a beautiful look and aligns the shooters eye up perfectly with open sight or a scope. The Model 70 Alaskan features a folding adjustable rear sight and a hooded gold front bead for fast target acquisition.

The pre-’64 style controlled round feed with claw extractor fully controls the cartridge from magazine to chamber to ejection. To help reduce felt recoil, the Model 70 Alaskan features the Pachmayr® Decelerator® Recoil Pad.

Some of the features on the Model 70 Alaskan that have given the Model 70 the reputation of being a very accurate firearm include:

  • MOA Trigger System – Zero creep and zero overtravel
  • Integral Recoil Lug -Forged and machined as part of the receiver
  • Free floating barrel – All Model 70 barrels are cold hammer forged
  • Alloy One-Piece Bottom Metal- Adds solid rigidity for better accuracy


Suggested Retail, $1,269.99

Now if they would only build this in a stainless model with a fiberglass stock I think it would stand up to the wet weather of Alaska.

Uncategorized

State Senator Leland Yee – The General Gage Of California

May 21, 2012 by 3 Comments

A few weeks ago, CBS 5 in San Francisco had a breathless report about a “loophole” in California gun laws that allowed people to have “assault weapons”. The so-called loophole that was just discovered by the intrepid reporters is something called a bullet button which has been around for five years or so. A bullet button allows the use of a removable magazine on an AR-15. However, one must use a tool or the tip of your bullet to remove that magazine. Essentially, it is device that allows fixed magazines to be removed for either loading or clearing a jam.

As sure as the sun sets in the West, you just knew that some politician was going to jump on this imagined bandwagon and introduce a law to outlaw bullet buttons. That politician is State Senator Leland Yee, Ph.D. who represents parts of San Francisco and San Mateo Counties.

Today, Yee introduced his bill to outlaw bullet buttons. He will be gutting the contents of SB 249 and replacing them with his anti-bullet button language.

Leland Yee – California’s General Gage

From his press release:

“There is absolutely no reason why these military style weapons need to have such easily changeable magazines,” said Yee. “While most gun owners are law abiding, I am deeply concerned with these assault weapons getting into the wrong hands, resulting in mass casualties of civilians or law enforcement officers.”

Magazines, or the storage areas that allow for repeat firing, that can be removed by a normal push button in combination with features such as a pistol grip and telescoping stock are banned in California. The law essentially requires magazines to be fixed, or removed or replaced with the use of a tool, in order to slow down the process of reloading.

To get around the law, gun makers have created a new mechanism, or “tool,” that allows the magazine to be easily removed by the tip of a bullet or in some cases by just putting a small magnet over the “bullet button,” basically recreating a normal push button and allowing magazines to be changed within seconds.

“These conversions are circumventing the spirit of California’s assault weapon statute,” said Yee. “Absent this bill, California’s assault weapon ban is significantly weakened. For the safety of the general public, we must close this loophole.”

Fortunately, the people of California have groups like CalGuns and its president, Gene Hoffman, fighting for them. I just loved the historical lesson Gene gave the reporter from CBS 5 and Senator Yee.  Having seen them in action, it would be good for them to take it to heart.

Yee seems to be the type of politician that thrives on attention from special interest groups such as the Brady Campaign and the Violence Policy Center. In his recent effort to be elected Mayor of San Francisco, he touted how he had landed virtually “every major endorsement in the race for mayor.” Yee finished in 5th place.

As a final aside, I find it amusing that Senator Yee insists on putting Ph.D. after his name on his legislative website. While some may find legislators childish, Yee’s doctorate in child psychology has nothing to do with his job as a State Senator. I am reminded of something my late wife Rosanne said about her own Ph.D. – earned at a much more prestigious institution and in a more rigorous field – when asked why she didn’t put it after her name in general usage. She said, and I quote, “that and 50 cents will buy you a cup of coffee.” I think that puts it into perspective.

Uncategorized

An Attempt To Negate The Bateman Win Which Must Be Stopped

May 21, 2012 by 4 Comments

Bateman v. Perdue was a win for the Second Amendment. US District Court Judge Malcolm Howard found the North Carolina emergency ban on off-premises firearms during a declared state of emergency unconstitutional.

Rather, the statutes here excessively intrude upon plaintiffs’ Second Amendment rights by effectively banning them (and the public at large) from engaging in conduct that is at the very core of the Second Amendment at a time when the need for self-defense may be at its very greatest. See Heller, 128 S. Ct. at 2799 (“[A]mericans understood the ‘right of self-preservation’ as permitting a citizen to ‘repe[l] force by force’ when ‘the intervention of society in his behalf, may be too late to prevent an injury. ‘ ” (quoting 1 Blackstone’s Commentaries 145-146, n.42 (1803) ) (second alteration in original)). Consequently, the emergency declaration laws are invalid as applied to plaintiffs.

On Tuesday, the NC State Senate Judiciary I Committee will take up consideration of HB 489 which is currently titled “Mechanics Lien and Bond Law Changes”. It had been approved 116-0 last May by the NC House. However, there is a proposed Committee substitute “H489-CSSA-71 [v.4]” which would effectively negate the Bateman win and would, in fact, give state and local official more power to infringe upon gun rights. This proposed change has not been published on the General Assembly’s website but a copy was sent to Grass Roots North Carolina.

Grass Roots North Carolina points out the flaws in the substitute in an alert sent out late Friday. They are also encouraging everyone to send an email to the committee members which can be found at the link here.

The bill still restricts firearms outside the home during emergencies: Although new language in G.S. 14-288.12(b)(4) purports to let cities restrict outside-the-home carry only “when necessary to preserve the public peace where there is an imminent risk of damage, injury, or loss of life or property,” that language is so vague as to be meaningless. Virtually every state of emergency – be it hurricane, riot or snowstorm – carries these “imminent risks.”

Regulations now reach into your home: Although the bill purports to forbid cities from regulating guns and ammunition in the home during emergencies, neither cities nor the state ever had the power to apply in-home bans during states of emergency. Translated, by stipulating what lawful gun-related activities you may do in the home, the bill tries to replace your unequivocal right to arms in the home with a restricted “right” to arms in the home.

HB 489 replaces an unconstitutional statute with another unconstitutional statute: But because laws are constitutional until proven otherwise, you’ll have to go back to court to prove it.

The proposed committee substitute to HB 489 reads as follow:

AN ACT TO AUTHORIZE THE POSSESSION, STORAGE, AND USE OF DANGEROUS WEAPONS DURING A STATE OF EMERGENCY FOR SELF DEFENSE IN A  PERSON’S HOME OR FOR OTHER LAWFUL PURPOSES IN A PERSON’S HOME;  AND TO AUTHORIZE THE TRANSPORTATION, POSSESSION, SALE, OR  PURCHASE OF AMMUNITION FOR SELF DEFENSE PURPOSES IN A PERSON’S  HOME OR FOR OTHER LAWFUL PURPOSES IN A PERSON’S HOME.

The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts:
SECTION 1. G.S. 14-288.7 is repealed.

SECTION 2. G.S. 14-288.12 reads as rewritten:
Ҥ 14-288.12. Powers of municipalities to enact ordinances to deal with states of emergency.
(a) The governing body of any municipality may enact ordinances designed to permit the imposition of prohibitions and restrictions during a state of emergency.
(b) The ordinances authorized by this section may permit prohibitions and restrictions:
(1) Of movements of people in public places, including directing and compelling the evacuation of all or part of the population from any stricken or threatened area within the governing body’s jurisdiction, to prescribe routes, modes of transportation, and destinations in connection with evacuation; and to control ingress and egress of a disaster area, and the movement of persons within the area;
(2) Of the operation of offices, business establishments, and other places to or from which people may travel or at which they may congregate;congregate, including places that sell dangerous weapons, notwithstanding subdivision (4) of this subsection.
(3) Upon the possession, transportation, sale, purchase, and consumption of alcoholic beverages;
(4) Upon the possession, transportation, sale, purchase, storage, and use of dangerous weapons and substances, and gasoline; and gasoline, when necessary to preserve the public peace where there is an imminent risk of damage, injury, or loss of life or property, except that prohibitions and restrictions adopted pursuant to this subdivision shall not do any of the following:
a. Prohibit the possession, storage, or use of a dangerous weapon for self-defense in a person’s home or for other lawful purposes in a person’s home or on other real property in which a person has a lawful possessory or ownership interest.
b. Prohibit the transportation, possession, sale, purchase, or use of ammunition for self-defense purposes in a person’s home or on other real property in which a person has a lawful possessory or ownership interest.
(5) Upon other activities or conditions the control of which may be reasonably necessary to maintain order and protect lives or property during the state of emergency.
The ordinances may delegate to the mayor of the municipality the authority to determine and proclaim the existence of a state of emergency, and to impose those authorized prohibitions and restrictions appropriate at a particular time.
(b1) For purposes of Subdivision (b)(4) of this section, the term ‘home’ means a building or conveyance of any kind, to include its curtilage, whether the building or conveyance is 16 temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed as a temporary or permanent residence.
(c) This section is intended to supplement and confirm the powers conferred by G.S. 160A-174(a), and all other general and local laws authorizing municipalities to enact ordinances for the protection of the public health and safety in times of riot or other grave civil 21 disturbance or emergency.
(d) Any ordinance of a type authorized by this section promulgated prior to June 19, 23 1969 shall, if otherwise valid, continue in full force and effect without reenactment.
(e) Any person who violates any provision of an ordinance or a proclamation enacted or proclaimed under the authority of this section is guilty of a Class 3 misdemeanor.”

SECTION 3. If House Bill 843, 2011 Regular Session, becomes law, then Section 2(c) of that act is rewritten to read:
“SECTION 2.(c) G.S. 14-288.7 is repealed.”

SECTION 4. If House Bill 843, 2011 Regular Session, becomes law, then G.S. 166A-19.31(b), as enacted by Section 1(b) of that act, reads as rewritten:
“(b) Type of Prohibitions and Restrictions Authorized. – The ordinances authorized by this section may permit prohibitions and restrictions:
(1) Of movements of people in public places, including imposing a curfew; directing and compelling the voluntary or mandatory evacuation of all or part of the population from any stricken or threatened area within the governing body’s jurisdiction; prescribing routes, modes of transportation, and destinations in connection with evacuation; and controlling ingress and egress of an emergency area, and the movement of persons within the area.
(2) Of the operation of offices, business establishments, and other places to or from which people may travel or at which they may congregate. congregate, including places that sell dangerous weapons, notwithstanding subdivision (4) of this subsection.
(3) Upon the possession, transportation, sale, purchase, and consumption of alcoholic beverages.
(4) Upon the possession, transportation, sale, purchase, storage, and use of dangerous weapons and substances, and gasoline. gasoline, when necessary to preserve the public peace where there is an imminent risk of damage, injury, or loss of life or property, except that prohibitions and restrictions adopted pursuant to this subdivision shall not do any of the following:
a. Prohibit the possession, storage, or use of a dangerous weapon for self-defense in a person’s home or for other lawful purposes in a person’s home or on other real property in which a person has a lawful possessory or ownership interest.
b. Prohibit the transportation, possession, sale, purchase, or use of ammunition for self-defense purposes in a person’s home or on other real property in which a person has a lawful possessory or ownership interest.
As used in this subdivision, the term ‘dangerous weapon and substance’ has the same meaning as it does under G.S. 14-288.1.
(5) Upon other activities or conditions the control of which may be reasonably necessary to maintain order and protect lives or property during the state of emergency.
The ordinances authorized by this section need not require or provide for the imposition of all of the types of prohibitions or restrictions, or any particular prohibition or restriction, authorized by this section during an emergency but may instead authorize the official or officials who impose those prohibitions or restrictions to determine and impose the prohibitions or restrictions deemed necessary or suitable to a particular state of emergency.”

SECTION 5. If House Bill 843, 2011 Regular Session, becomes law, then G.S. 166A-19.31, as enacted by Section 1(b) of that act, is amended by adding a new subsection to read:
“(b1) For purposes of Subdivision (b)(4) of this section, the term ‘home’ means a building 22 or conveyance of any kind, to include its curtilage, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed as a temporary or permanent residence.”

SECTION 6. This act is effective when it becomes law.

When I read through this substitute bill I was aghast. It explicitly authorizes the same restrictions that Judge Howard just found unconstitutional with the exception of the transport of ammo. Moreover, the Heller decision explicitly – not implied or inferred but explicitly – said the Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear a firearm in the home for self-defense. So where does the drafter of this substitute bill get off saying the state can “authorize” the possession of a firearm in my home?

At the GRNC Annual Meeting held in Greensboro yesterday evening, GRNC President Paul Valone discussed this bill at length. He noted that no one on the committee seems to be willing to take credit for its drafting.

I should hope not! The Judiciary I Committee should consign this committee substitute to the dustbin of history.

Uncategorized

How Would You Feel About MAIG Regional Coordinators Paid With Your Tax Dollars?

May 21, 2012 by 2 Comments

You’d probably feel just the same way I do – angry, disgusted, and, if it were my tax dollars, pissed off.

From the All Nine Yards blog:

Here’s a great way to reduce overhead and be effective at running a national organization dedicated to infringing on the gun rights of everyday people all at the same time… Have cities hire your people for you so that tax payers pay for ¼ of your people’s salary and benefits, most of their operational costs, and all of their other resources! It also embeds your people as leaders in city government so that you don’t have to lobby there!

Sounds like another conspiracy theory from the tinfoil hat brigade… Right?

Back in March, while researching the repeal of some anti-gun ordinances, I stumbled across an Orlando City Council agenda item that grabbed my attention. It was, on its surface, just a mundane action item for the annual contract renewal of a city employee. But this city employee’s job title was, well, unique…

“Approving Employment Contract for the Grant-Funded Position of Mayors Against Illegal Guns Regional Coordinator.”

Sean Caranna has uncovered this rat’s nest and it isn’t limited to Orlando, Florida. He has found similar regional coordinators embedded in city governments in Maine, Minnesota, New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania as well other place in Florida.

Sean’s well-research and well-documented post is a must read. After you read it – and stop cursing – forward links to it to all your friends.