This afternoon Fox New’s Judge Andrew Napolitano analyzed the decision by Judge Edmond Chang yesterday in Illinois Association of Firearm Retailers et al v. City of Chicago et al that found the ban on gun sales and gun stores unconstitutional.
Judge Napolitano was interviewed for a segment of Fox’s America’s News HQ program.
The 3 minute video can be found here.
Sometimes our opponents in the war for gun rights reveal more about themselves than they quite realize.
The Demanding Moms sent out a tweet earlier today announcing the court decision that found the City of Chicago’s gun store ban as unconstitutional. I retweeted that with comment that the court’s decision was as it should be. A gun prohibitionist was quick to reply.
by
@jpr9954 @MomsDemand Gun nuts make me worry.
— ferrarimanf355 (@ferrarimanf355) January 7, 2014
Now you might think that someone who has the Twitter name “Ferrarimanf355” might drive something like this.
If you thought so, you’d be wrong.
Actually, Ferrarimanf355 drives a red Fiat 500….that he bought with help from his mom.
That’s not only sad but it’s pathetic. No wonder I make him worry.
US District Court Judge Edmond E. Chang found that the City of Chicago’s ban on the sale or transfer of a firearm except by inheritance was unconstitutional in a ruling today in US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. The case was brought by the Illinois Association of Firearms Retailers and three individual plaintiffs against the City of Chicago and Mayor Rahm Emanuel.
Under Chicago Municipal Code § 8-20-100-a:
(a) Except as authorized by section 2-84-075, no firearm may be sold, acquired or otherwise transferred within the city, except through inheritance of the firearm.
The exceptions are for sales to police officers as authorized by the Police Superintendent and for loans of firearms at ranges. The ban did include transfers including gifts between family members. More importantly, the ban also includes federally licensed firearms dealers.
Judge Chang prefaces his opinion by saying, in part, that:
certain fundamental right are protected by the Constitution, put outside
government’s reach, including the right to keep and bear arms for self-defense under
the Second Amendment. This right must also include the right to acquire a firearm,
although that acquisition right is far from absolute: there are many long-standing
restrictions on who may acquire firearms (for examples, felons and the mentally ill
have long been banned) and there are many restrictions on the sales of arms (for
example, licensing requirements for commercial sales). But Chicago’s ordinance goes
too far in outright banning legal buyers and legal dealers from engaging in lawful
acquisitions and lawful sales of firearms, and at the same time the evidence does not
support that the complete ban sufficiently furthers the purposes that the ordinance
tries to serve.
Chicago had tried to argue that their ordinance was aimed at preventing crime by preventing gang members from obtaining firearms. Research by certain well-known anti-gun academics such as Philip Cook and Jens Ludwig purported to show that gang members were reluctant to leave their territory in order to obtain firearms for fear of intruding upon another gang’s territory. Thus, Chicago tried to show that by relegating gun sales to the suburbs that gangs would have a harder and more expensive time obtaining firearms. Judge Chang rejected this saying that residents who could legally own a firearm would bear more of the burden of added transaction costs than would gang members.
Another argument that Chicago tried to put forth was that they could ban gun stores because the BATFE did not effectively monitor them. They called it part of a “chronically-diseased regime that is fundamentally broken” in terms of regulation. But, as Judge Chang noted, nothing in the ordinance offered more resources to BATFE or pledge enhanced cooperation by the Chicago PD with BATFE.
Judge Chang also notes that the Chicago ordinance went well beyond state and federal law in banning transfers and gifts between individuals and family members who were legally permitted to own firearms. They did this without any studies or justification for the ban. He said, “This lack of justification only bolsters the conclusion that these Municipal Code ordinances are substantially overinclusive and do not pass muster under Ezell’s rigorous scrutiny.”
Judge Chang concludes his opinion by stating:
In sum, given the rigorous showing that
Ezell
demands, the City has not
demonstrated that allowing gun sales and transfers within city limits creates such
genuine and serious risks to public safety that flatly prohibiting them is justified. If the
City is concerned about reducing criminal access to firearms, either through legitimate
retail transactions or via thefts from gun stores, it may enact more appropriately
tailored measures. Indeed, nothing in this opinion prevents the City from considering
other regulations—short of the complete ban—on sales and transfers of firearms to
minimize the access of criminals to firearms and to track the ownership of firearms.
But the flat ban on legitimate sales and transfers does not fit closely with those goals. MCC § 8-20-100 and its zoning ordinance (to the extent that it bans the operation of
gun stores in Chicago) are therefore unconstitutional.
The plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment was granted and the defendants’ motion was denied. Judge Chang then stayed his ruling to give Chicago time to file an appeal, to file a motion to stay his ruling, and/or to change the laws in question.
The decision can be found here.
According to the infographic from the National Shooting Sports Foundation shown below, pretty damn big!
Many years ago I worked for a local knife company that had a small booth at the SHOT Show. As a result, I got to attend the 1996 SHOT Show held in Dallas, Texas. I was awed by the size of it all back then when it was just a shadow of what it has become. With luck and good scheduling, I plan to attend next year’s SHOT Show and I’m sure I’ll just be blown away by it all.
It is that time of month again. Aaron at Weapon-Blog has just posted his list of gun giveaways and contests.
In the long gun categories, I see not just a bunch of AR-15s but the new Ruger SR-762 and a Daniel Defense AR-15. You can add a Benelli M4 to that list.
Under handguns, Aaron has listed some interesting pistols including the Boberg XR9-S, a custom Springfield 1911, and a Springfield XDm 3.8 in 9mm.
You can find the whole list here.
If you get a chance, leave a comment thanking Aaron for putting these up on a monthly basis.
In an era where virtually everything is a crime, it is important to know the law. This is especially true with regard to knife laws which vary tremendously. They not only vary state to state but from municipality to municipality as there are few state preemption laws with regard to knifes.
The infographic below from Knifeup.com is a good start and presents the info in an easily understood form. I’d also suggest becoming a member of Knife Rights as they are taking the fight for knife rights to both the court house and the state house.
One example of how fast knife laws are changing is the info below on which states make automatic or switchblade knives illegal. It lists both Kansas and Missouri as prohibiting them. Thanks to Knife Rights, this was recently changed and they are now legal there.
Infographic removed due to inaccuracies.
If you’d still like to see it, go to KnifeUp.com. See comments below as to some of the inaccuracies. Alternatively, go to Liston’s website here.
H/T Liston Matthews of Good Hill Press
Dick Metcalf, formerly of Guns & Ammo magazine, was fired because he tried to argue that gun control was OK constitutionally because the Second Amendment includes the words “well-regulated”. In other words, Metcalf was fired for stupidity. I shed no tears over that.
Yesterday, the New York Times, no friend of gun rights or gun owners, decided that Mr. Metcalf would make a great poster boy to show how authoritarian and how close-minded we are. Moreover, it looks like Mr. Metcalf cooperated fully with the Time’s reporter.
This is a war. You do not give aid and comfort to the enemy. Mr. Metcalf did that with his G&A editorial and this is what he is doing now.
In the article that appeared online yesterday and on the front page of the print edition today, Metcalf said:
“I’ve been vanished, disappeared,” Mr. Metcalf, 67, said in an interview last month on his gun range here, about 100 miles north of St. Louis, surrounded by snow-blanketed fields and towering grain elevators. “Now you see him. Now you don’t.”
He is unsure of his next move, but fears he has become a pariah in the gun industry, to which, he said, he has devoted nearly his entire adult life.
While being the subject of front-page profile in the Times may impress his former colleagues at Yale and Cornell, it won’t help him within the gun culture. If anything, it completes his estrangement from those of us in the gun culture.
I don’t feel sorry for Mr. Metcalf. He has made his bed and now he has to sleep in it. Now if he’d just realize it.
Rumors have abounded on the Internet about the new Glock that will be officially released at the 2014 SHOT Show. Glock itself had teaser ads out in November about a smaller Glock pistol officially named the G42.
Just before Christmas, a post on BoomerShooter.com had two pictures of either a catalog page or an ad showing the G42 as being a single stack .380 ACP pistol. As Steve at the Firearm Blog said, they looked legit.
I guess they looked legit because they probably are legit if the video below released by Glock Inc USA is to be believed. I can’t see Glock releasing misleading info on a new pistol on their official YouTube page. The video features Chris Reese, Warranty Tech Supervisor, of Glock, Inc. North America describing the new G42.
There are a lot of single stack 6+1 .380 ACP pistols out there now ranging from the Ruger LCP to the Sig P238 and everything in between. I’m sure the Glock is a decent pistol and will have good sales but the market has moved on to the pocket or micro-nines.
It could be that Glock is going to release a single stack nine as both the G41 and G43 are supposed to be released as well. They could be using the rumor mill about the G42 as a red herring to make the introduction of a pocket 9mm more newsworthy. I don’t know and I’m guessing the only people who do know either work for Glock or have signed a really tight non-disclosure agreement.
UPDATE: SayUncle has a video up of the Glock 41 which is a long-slide .45 ACP pistol. You can see it here.
From today’s Wall Street Journal comes this weird little story about Walmart in China.
BEIJING— Wal-Mart Stores Inc. is recalling donkey meat sold at some of its China stores after government tests showed the meat contained the DNA of other animals.
The retailer will provide 50 yuan, or roughly $8.25, compensation to customers who bought the “Five Spice” donkey meat, and it is boosting its own DNA testing for meat products sold in its China stores, a spokeswoman said Thursday. Authorities in China’s eastern Shandong province said in late December that the retailer’s product contained fox meat.
The Wal-Mart spokeswoman said the donkey meat—which is commonly consumed in Chinese cuisine—is sold in only two stores in Jinan, the capital of Shandong. Wal-Mart is working with authorities to investigate the product and its manufacturing process, the spokeswoman said, adding that the retailer may take legal action against its supplier.
“Five Spice” donkey meat? Fox meat?
I don’t know what the fox says about this but I think I might go vegetarian the next time I go out for Chinese.
Magpul Industries has made it official. Their company’s new home will be in both Wyoming and Texas. Back in February, Magpul drew their line in the sand and said they would be leaving Colorado if House Bill 1224 which limited magazine size passed the State Legislature and was signed by Gov. John Hickenlooper (D-CO). The Democrats passed the bill, Hickenlooper signed it, and Magpul is making good on their intention to move all their operations out of the state.
Magpul will be moving their manufacturing and distribution facilities to Cheyenne, Wyoming. Their company headquarters will be to one of three North Central Texas sites under consideration. Both the states of Wyoming and Texas have put together grant and tax relief packages to lure Magpul to their states. Moreover, both Gov. Matt Mead (R-WY) and Gov. Rick Perry (R-TX) were involved in the pursuit of Magpul.
HiViz Sights moved to the Laramie area earlier this year. Alfred Manufacturing and Lawrence Tool & Molding, both of whom are suppliers to Magpul, had announced their intention to leave Colorado along with Magpul. I cannot find any news on whether they plan to move their facilities to Wyoming along with Magpul.
Magpul’s official announcement is below:
Magpul Industries announced today that it is relocating its operations to Wyoming and Texas.
The company is relocating manufacturing, distribution and shipping operations to Cheyenne, Wyoming. Magpul is leasing a 58,000 square foot manufacturing and distribution facility during the construction of a 100,000 square foot build-to-suit facility in the Cheyenne Business Parkway. The Wyoming relocation is being completed with support from Governor Matt Mead, the Wyoming Business Council and Cheyenne LEADS.
Magpul is moving its corporate headquarters to Texas. Three North Central Texas sites are under final consideration, and the transition to the Texas headquarters will begin as soon as the facility is selected. The Texas relocation is being accomplished with support from Governor Rick Perry and the Texas Economic Development Corporation.
“Magpul made the decision to relocate in March 2013 and has proceeded on an aggressive but deliberate path” says Doug Smith, Chief Operating Officer for Magpul Industries. “These dual moves will be carried out in a manner that ensures our operations and supply chain will not be interrupted and our loyal customers will not be affected.”
The company began a nationwide search for a new base of operations after legislation was enacted in Colorado that dramatically limits the sale of firearms accessories – the core of Magpul’s business. Magpul plans on initially transitioning 92% of its current workforce outside of Colorado within 12-16 months and will maintain only limited operations in Colorado.
“Moving operations to states that support our culture of individual liberties and personal responsibility is important,” says Richard Fitzpatrick, Chief Executive Officer for Magpul Industries. “This relocation will also improve business operations and logistics as we utilize the strengths of Texas and Wyoming in our expansion.”