HB 562 Is Reported Out Of Rules Committee And I’m Not Happy

The devil is in the details as they say. Yesterday, the NC House’s Rules Committee reported out a committee substitute version of HB 563, the Second Amendment Affirmation Act, and I’m not exactly happy. Yes, there are good things in the bill and yes, it goes to the floor of the House. However, the way the Rules Committee has so mangled up the elimination of the pistol purchase permit irks me to no end.

Section 18 of the revised bill states in part:

Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 10 of this act
become effective October 1, 2021, and apply to offenses committed on or after that date.
Subsection (c) of Section 10 of this act becomes effective October 1, 2018, and applies to
offenses committed on or after that date. Subsection (d) of Section 10 of this act becomes
effective December 1, 2015, and applies to offenses committed on or after that date.

As I said, the devils in the details. What this means is that the pistol purchase permit system is eliminated in its entirety effective October 1, 2021 as Section 10 (a) and (b) refer to those parts of the General Statutes controlling permits. However, if you purchase a pistol from an FFL after October 1, 2018, a permit won’t be needed if they run a NICS check.

The original substitute bill that I saw earlier this week would have set that date at December 1, 2015. What this means is that the Rules Committee and the House Republicans have again kow-towed to the North Carolina Sheriffs Association. If this provision remains in the bill and the bills passes into law, the sheriffs will continue to get their $5 per permit for another three years.

What makes this more egregious is that Bloomberg and his Demanding Mommies in their Felon Orange Tee’s will claim this as a victory for gun control. This when most Republican House members don’t give a large rodent’s behind for them but will bend over backwards to the NCSA.

The changes in Section 10 (d) are actually good and timely. It provides standardization of the forms and process. The “good moral character” provision limits the evaluation of conduct to the last five years. Finally, it allows for appeals that can go up as far as the Court of Appeals. Previously, appeals stopped at District Court.

The arguments put forth by the sheriffs and the NCSA that they know the people in their county and know who is a potential problem are ridiculous. To think that is superior to a NICS check for a new purchase is a joke. The way the sheriffs are clinging to this Jim Crow inspired law is appalling. That some of the bitterest clingers are African-Americans is just even more appalling.

If we can’t do away with the law, I say return it to the Clerks of Court where it was originally. Heaven knows they are better record keepers than any sheriff’s department in the state and most likely much less biased.

“An Act to Regulate the Sale of Concealed Weapons in North Carolina” – Part II

In any discussion of the 1919 act regulating the purchase of certain weapons in North Carolina, you have to go back to the state of politics as they existed in the 1890s. Post-Reconstruction, the Democrats had regained power in the state from the Republicans. However, this dominance was threatened in the 1890s by the rise of what was called Fusion politics. The Republicans and the Populist Party in North Carolina, while they differed on a national agenda, agreed on many items including education, voting rights, and the restoration of the charter of the Farmer’s Alliance which the Democrat-controlled General Assembly had revoked.

The guiding principle behind the fusion of the Republicans and the Populists was that they would agree to support the stronger candidate in each race against the Democrat’s candidate. Sometimes this would be the Populist and sometimes this would be the Republican. The elections of 1894 showed the success of the fusion approach. The Fusionists gained six US House seats from the Democrats; two for the Republicans and four for the Populists. They also elected both US Senators and took a super-majority in both house of the NC General Assembly. They repeated this success in the elections of 1896 where they widened their lead in the General Assembly, picked up another US House seat, and Republican Daniel Russell was elected governor. The General Assembly that convened in 1895 had five African-Americans as members and it loosened voting restrictions on blacks. As a result, voting participation of African-Americans increased significantly.

The Democrats had to come up with a strategy to overcome the successful fusion between the Populists and Republicans. They turned to New Bern attorney Furnifold M. Simmons who was appointed chairman of the NC Democratic Party. Simmons organized local party organizations in each county as well as a speaker’s bureau of orators such as South Carolina’s infamous Pitchfork Ben Tillman. The overriding strategy was based upon one thing: white supremacy.

The “white supremacy campaign” was exactly that. The Democrats repeatedly stated that only white men were fit to hold political office. They often accused the fusionists, especially the Republicans, of supporting “negro domination” in the state. Indeed, there were a large number of African American officeholders, some of whom had been elected and many more who were appointed to office. The Democrats referred to themselves as the “white man’s party” and appealed to white North Carolinians to restore them to power.

One of the most significant events of the campaign was the appearance of an editorial in the Wilmington Daily Record on August 18, 1898. The Daily Record was an African American newspaper published by Alex Manly. The editorial was a response to a speech by a Georgia woman who had called for the widespread lynching of African American men in order to protect white women. The Daily Record suggested that consensual relationships between African American men and white women were common and that often the man was accused of rape only after the relationship was discovered. Once the Democratic papers got hold of the editorial there was an uproar. Under headings such as “Vile and Villainous” and “A Horrid Slander,” the editorial was reprinted throughout the state. Some Democratic papers continued to run it in almost every single issue up to election day.

Not only was the election of 1898 built around white supremacy, it featured the intimidation of black voters by the neo-Fascist Red Shirts at the behest of Simmons as well as an actual coup d’etat after the election in Wilmington. Josephus Daniels, publisher of the News and Observer and an ardent white supremacist, said of Simmons that he was “a genius in putting everybody to
work—men who could write, men who could speak, and men who could ride—the last by no means the least important.” (As an aside, the News and Observer is editorializing in favor of keeping Jim Crow laws from that era.)

The role of newspapers such as the N&O, the Charlotte Observer, the Wilmington Morning Star, and the Wilmington Messenger cannot be understated. While their current staff and readership would be appalled by the overtly racist messages they published, they were the essential propaganda arm of the Democratic Party in North Carolina. In an era before the advent of TV and radio, the newspapers were the media. They conveyed the message to their readers through both editorials and through cartoons aimed at the less literate. Norman Jennett’s cartoons for the N&O ran above the fold and were praised by Democrats as “one of the powers that brought about the revolution.” Many of them can be found here.

On the eve of the 1898 election, Simmons wrote an editorial that laid out the reasons to vote for the Democrats and at its heart was the cause of white supremacy. It appeared on the front page of Daniels’ N&O on November 3rd.

Then came the evidence, disclosing the actual condition of affairs, in that section of the State, which astonished and shocked the consciences and moral sensibilities of the people.

NEGRO CONGRESSMEN, NEGRO SOLICITORS, NEGRO REVENUE OFFICERS, NEGRO COLLECTORS OF CUSTOMS, NEGROES in charge of white institutions, NEGROES in charge of white schools, NEGROES holding inquests over the white dead, NEGROES controlling the finances of great cities, NEGROES in control of the sanitation and police of cities, NEGRO CONSTABLES arresting white women and white men, NEGRO MAGISTRATES trying white women and white men, white convicts chained to NEGRO CONVICTS and forced to social equality with them, until the proofs rose up, and stood forth “like Pelion on Ossa piled.”….

The battle has been fought, the victory is within our reach. North Carolina is a WHITE MAN’S State, and WHITE MEN will rule it, and they will crush the party of negro domination beneath a majority so overwhelming that no other party will ever again dare to attempt to establish negro rule here.

They CANNOT intimidate us; they CANNOT buy us, and they SHALL NOT cheat us out of the fruits of our victory.

And victory was what the Democrats got in 1898. They gained back five seats in Congress from the Populists and Republicans and a super majority in the General Assembly (2 Populists and a smattering of mountain Republicans remained). While the fusionists won in Wilmington, then the state’s largest city, that lasted all of two days until white supremacists rioted and took over the city council from the elected representatives in what became known as the Wilmington Massacre.

They consolidated their gains in 1900 with the election of Democrat Charles B. Aycock as governor, the appointment of Simmons as US Senator, and a constitutional amendment that imposed both a poll tax and a literacy test. The amendment contained a grandfather clause enabling anyone whose ancestors were eligible to vote prior to 1867 to vote. Voter turnout dropped from around 85% in 1896 to less than 50% thereafter. A Republican would not be governor of North Carolina again until 1972 and a Republican majority in either house of the General Assembly until 2010.

Not only had the Democrats cemented their power but so had Furnifold Simmons. He would serve in the US Senate for 30 years and would use the power of patronage to maintain his control. Only once in the succeeding years was his candidate defeated for governor in the Democratic primary and then he worked to destroy the man. His organization wrote journalist W. J. Cash reached to “the headwaters of every Little Buffalo and Sandy Run in North Carolina; into every alley of every factory town.” The Democratic Party controlled a segregationist North Carolina and the Simmons Machine controlled the Democratic Party.

Part III will cover the passage of the act through the General Assembly in 1919 with the primary sponsor being none other than Simmons’ brother-in-law Sen. Earle A. Humphrey (D-Goldsboro).

Jim Crow Law Lives Until 2021

According to WRAL Raleigh, HB 562 – the Second Amendment Affirmation Act – was postponed for consideration until Wednesday. The House Rules Committee will vote on a committee substitute at 9am tomorrow. A summary of the committee summary can be found here and the actual text here. It does include the elimination of the pistol purchase permit but not until 2021. Dealers, however, would be allowed to sell handguns without a pistol purchase permit if they ran a NICS check on the person.

Come 2021, North Carolina residents would no longer need a permit when buying handguns under a redrafted omnibus firearms bill that circulated among members of the General Assembly Tuesday night.

The House Rules Committee is scheduled to vet the new version of HB 562 at 9 a.m. Wednesday. According to a summary of the bill provided to committee members, the measure still contains measures related to how doctors ask patients about firearms in their homes, although the language is loser than earlier versions of the bill.

Advocates for and against the measure were at the state Capitol on Tuesday. The lobbying group Moms Demand Action pressured lawmakers to turn back the bill, focusing particularly on the pistol permit provision. Meanwhile, the pro-gun lobbying group Grass Roots North Carolina pressured lawmakers to pass the bill.

The most scrutiny has focused on a provision that would repeal North Carolina’s pistol purchase permit system. As originally drafted, the bill would have ended the state’s pistol permit system in 2018. The measure up for consideration Wednesday morning would extend the system’s life until 2021.

Sen. Furnifold Simmons and early N&O owner Josephus Daniels are probably laughing from the grave over this turn of events. They were the architects of the racist white supremacy policies of the North Carolina Democratic Party. The co-sponsor of the Senate bill that eventually became law was none other than Simmons’ former brother-in-law Sen. Earle A. Humphrey (D-Goldsboro).  Simmons’ dominance of North Carolina politics in that era was so far reaching that it was referred to as the Simmons Machine just like Richard Daley’s dominance of Chicago politics was called the Daley Machine.

SAF Files Amicus Brief In NC Gun Range Zoning Case

The NC Court of Appeals upheld Franklin County’s Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) in a split decision in 2014. Their ruling upheld a Superior Court ruling denying the plaintiffs the ability to build a shooting range.

Aaron Byrd and Eric Coombs had sought to build a shooting range on property they owned in the county. The county’s Planning Director has first told them they couldn’t do it because the UDO didn’t list it as an approved use. The Director later amended his decision to say that Byrd and Coombs could have a range if they applied for a special use permit under the Open Air Games classification. They applied to the Franklin County Board of Commissioners for this special use permit in December 2012 and were denied.

Shortly thereafter, Byrd and Coombs were issued notices that they were in violation of the zoning code and they must “cease and desist” all activities related to the shooting range. They appealed the Code Officer’s notices to the county’s Board of Adjustment. (As an aside, I served on the Town of Wayneville’s Board of Adjustment for 19 years.) The Board of Adjustment is a quasi-judicial board whose rulings can be appealed to the Superior Court. They were turned down here and made a timely appeal to Superior Court. As noted in the first paragraph, the Superior Court upheld the ruling of the Board of Adjustment.

Byrd and Coombs contend that since the UDO made no mention of regulating shooting ranges, then they don’t need approval from the county to build their range. Moreover, they said that classifying a shooting range as an Open Air Game was in error. Finally, they argued that an earlier Court of Appeals case, Land v. Village of Wesley Chapel, has set the precedent in their favor.

The opinion of the Court of Appeals stated they agreed that the classification of the shooting range as an Open Air Game was erroneous. They they went on to say this:

However, we disagree with
Petitioners that the UDO does not regulate shooting ranges at
all, but it does in fact prohibit shooting ranges anywhere in
the County
by providing that “[u]ses not specifically listed in
the Table [] are prohibited.” Accordingly, we hold that the
superior court did not err in affirming the County’s order that
Petitioners cease and desist from operating a shooting range on
the Property
.

Judge Robert Hunter dissented from this opinion in part saying that he thought the Land case precedent on shooting ranges ruled in this case. It should be noted that Judge Hunter wrote the opinion in the Land case. He said the Land case “cited long-standing precedent in
rejecting the notion that a zoning ordinance may prohibit uses
not explicitly allowed.”

Byrd and Coombs have now appealed this decision to the NC Supreme Court. On Friday, the Second Amendment Foundation filed an amicus brief on behalf on the plaintiffs. The SAF’s amicus brief was submitted by Raleigh attorney Camden Webb of Williams Mullin.

The Second Amendment Foundation amicus brief notes that this case does not only involve a judicial interpretation of the county’s UDO but “implicates an important Constitutional question.” The Court of Appeals by saying that the UDO prohibits shooting ranges in Franklin County is allowing “the impermissable infringement of the Second Amendment rights of the people of Franklin County, North Carolina.”

After discussing Heller, McDonald, and the appropriate level of scrutiny, the brief goes on to discuss the 7th Circuit’s ruling in the Ezell case. There the court said the the City of Chicago’s banning of all shooting ranges within the city limits was unconstitutional saying, in part, “the core right wouldn’t mean much without the training and practice to make it effective.” The brief argues that the 7th Circuit’s reasoning should apply in this case. The brief further argues that the county did not establish a close fit between the banning of a range and the public good or interest that it serves. Given the county is primarily rural, they say the “complete prohibition of a shooting ranges in such a county simply cannot pass constitutional muster.”

I’m glad the Second Amendment Foundation filed an amicus brief in this case. The precedent set by the Ezell case must be strongly defended and this brief does that. Alan Gottlieb noted that the SAF had to sue Chicago over this same issue.

HB 562 – the Second Amendment Affirmation Act – Scheduled Before The NC House Tomorrow

According to Grass Roots North Carolina, the full NC House of Representatives will be voting on HB 562, the Second Amendment Affirmation Act, tomorrow.

A full House vote for H562, the “Second Amendment Affirmation Act,” is scheduled for tomorrow, Tuesday, June 2nd . . .

This is encouraging news, but Michael Bloomberg’s paid anti-gun pressure groups have already announced that they will be slinking around the legislative buildings in an effort to pressure your representatives into ignoring the will of the people of North Carolina. That means:

WE NEED YOU!

Stand for Your Gun Rights on Tuesday

GRNC has been telling you about this ‘Michael Bloomberg Doesn’t Speak for Me’ event. If you haven’t already planned to be there, there has never been a better time to drop what you’re doing, and head to the Legislative Building, in Raleigh, to stand for what’s right!

Tomorrow morning (Tuesday), please join other GRNC supporters, and call on your representatives to do the right thing. Bring family, bring friends. Bring anyone who cares about the future of gun rights in North Carolina.

I posted details on the event yesterday. You can find all the details here.

If the House does indeed vote to pass HB 562 tomorrow – and they should – that would be a good repudiation of Bloomberg’s money.

GRNC To Counter-Protest The Demanding Moms On Tuesday

The Demanding Moms plan a protest on June 2nd at the North Carolina General Assembly Building against HB 562. They will be wearing orange shirts* because that is the color required of hunters for safety. It is unknown if they will be chanting “Hands Up, Don’t Shot” but nothing they do would surprise me.

Bloomberg and his orange-clad minions are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to defeat HB 562. They are running a media campaign plus running full-page ads in the News and Observer. They may be running ads in other papers for all I know. This is in addition to all the free media they are getting from the editorial pages of various NC newspapers.

Grass Roots North Carolina is organizing a counter-protest on Tuesday morning. They are asking people to wear either GRNC logo shirts or green shirts. Details are below.

A legislative history of the pistol purchase permits that would be eliminated can be found here.

Bloomberg’s Anti-gun Agitators Plan Protest…

The handful of “Moms Demand Action for Gunsense” activists hired by Bloomberg in North Carolina to attack our gun rights
plan to protest pro-freedom House Bill 562 this coming Tuesday, June 2nd, in the Capitol building. If you show up for anything, you
need to attend our counter protest on Tuesday!


As
you know, HB562 is an omnibus pro-gun rights bill that,
among other things, will finally rid our state of one of the last
vestiges of an unpleasant Jim Crow past: the antiquated pistol permit
system.
It
isn’t surprising that repressive politicians like
Bloomberg want to maintain discriminatory and anti-freedom laws. But
Bloomberg is particularly dangerous given billions at his disposal to
wield as a
weapon intending to
deprive every American of Second Amendment
rights.

Bloomberg is currently spending hundreds of thousands on TV ads to kill HB562, falsely claiming it
“abolishes” background checks.

GRNC Responds


In response, GRNC initiated
its “Michael Bloomberg doesn’t speak for me” radio ad campaign featuring real North Carolina
mothers who oppose Bloomberg and support HB 562. We kicked off
the campaign with a press conference heavily covered by
national media which can be seen on GRNC’s home page at www.GRNC.org, at which North Carolina women stood
before the world to de
clare: “I’m a North
Carolin
a Mom, and Michael Bloomberg doesn’t speak for
me!”

News & Observer Colludes

No friend to NC gun owners, the Raleigh News & Observer has run a
series of misleading Op Eds along with a full page Bloomberg-funded,
deceit-laden advertisement against HB562. As an example of the type of
deception engaged in, Bloomberg’s ad implies that HB562 will allow
violent
criminals to legally obtain and possess firearms:

“Under House Bill 562, felons and domestic abusers would be able to avoid a criminal background check by buying handguns from
unlicensed sellers -including strangers they meet online.”

GRNC Plans Counter Protest: BE THERE!

We say, if Bloomberg
wants a party at the General Assembly, let’s give him a party!
Accordingly,
we need YOU to show up at the North Carolina General Assembly
Legislative Building, 16 West Jones Street, Raleigh, NC
27601 at 8:30 AM on Tuesday, June 2, 2015. We will have a table set up
in the 1300 courtyard, on the left as you enter the building. If you
cannot
make it by 8:30 AM anytime before 10 AM will be helpful!

To demonstrate grassroots solidarity, we suggest wearing
GRNC apparel (polos, T-shirts, hats) or green (preferably bright green)
clothing
. We will have coordinated stickers for clothing and signs to carry.

If you wish to wear GRNC apparel, but don’t yet have any, please
email GRNC Director of Development, Josette Chimel and she will bring
the
items you want to the General Assembly. Please email Josette today at
DirectorofDevelopment@GRNC.org.
Bring as many of your friends and family as you can. Don’t forget to email GRNC Director of
Development, Josette Chimel with an estimate of the number who will be attending at

DirectorofDevelopment@GRNC.org.

IMMEDIATE ACTION
REQUIRED!

  • ATTEND ‘MICHAEL
    BLOOMBERG DOESN’T SPEAK FOR ME’ EVENT AT LEGISLATURE
    : If you can attend, please send an email to DirectorofDevelopment@GRNC.org and let us know how many people you can bring. Details:

WHEN: Tuesday, June 2, 2015; 8:30 AM
WHERE: Legislative Building

1300 Courtyard
16 W. Jones Street
Raleigh, NC 27601
MAPS &

DIRECTION
S:
Directions:

http://www.ncleg.net/NCGAInfo/visitinglegcomplex.html


Legislative Complex Map:

http://grnc.org/images/alertimages/legislative-complex-map.jpg
TIPS:
Due to morning traffic and
parking considerations, please allow for plenty of extra travel time. Please be at the Legislative Building Courtyard by 8:30
AM
.

Wear bright green clothing if possible.

  • CALL & EMAIL THE NEWS & OBSERVER: Contact N&O President/Publisher Orage Quarles III by emailing him this weekend at: oquarles@newsobserver.com
    AND calling him Monday morning as close as possible to 9:00 AM at (919)
    829-4659. Let him know you don’t appreciate the N&O acting as a
    shill for New York carpetbagger Michael Bloomberg, and that you will
    promptly cancel your subscription and boycott N&O advertisers. Use
    the copy/paste email below, under ‘Deliver This Message to the N&O.’
  • CONTRIBUTE TO GRNC: Unlike Bloomberg, we don’t have millions of dollars for this campaign. WE RELY ON YOU. If you have
    contributed, we thank you (and unfortunately have to ask for more). If you have not, please go to: http://grnc.org/join-grnc/contribute


DELIVER THIS MESSAGE TO THE N&O

Suggested Subject: “Stop Partnering with Bloomberg on H562 Falsehoods”  
Dear Mr. Quarles:

I am very disappointed to see “The News & Observer”
partnering with New York billionaire, Michael Bloomberg, to spread the
falsehood that H562 will eliminate criminal background checks for
handgun
purchases in North Carolina. Of course, nothing could be further from
the truth.

H562 eliminates the Jim Crow-era Pistol
Purchase Permit (PPP) system that was put in place to keep minorities
from obtaining firearms for self-protection, and it can still be used
by
sheriffs to arbitrarily restrict law-abiding citizens from exercising
their civil rights. H562 would replace this archaic and shameful system
with
the National Instant Criminal-Background Check System (NICS).

NICS is a modern, computerized system already used by
thirty-five other states and territories, and even in North Carolina
for long gun purchases. The NICS checks a purchaser’s background at the
point of sale, which is greatly superior to the PPP system, where a
sheriff issues a paper permit which can be valid for up to five years,
leaving
plenty of time for the permit-holder to commit disqualifying crimes, and
still use the valid permit to buy a handgun.

The
idea that H562 eliminates background checks is absurd, and two or three
minutes with any popular search engine makes that clear. “The News
& Observer” is in the research and information business. If you can
get something this easy to research so terribly wrong, it
couldn’t possibly be a mistake. Feigned ignorance and blatant untruths
have no place at a news organization.

Because
“The News & Observer” has decided to shill for Michael Bloomberg, I
intend to boycott your newspaper, and its advertisers. In fact,
I have already contacted one of your advertisers to let them know of my
intentions, due to their affiliation with your newspaper and its
willingness
to aid Mr. Bloomberg and his front groups.

I
will continue to track this issue through alerts from Grass Roots
North
Carolina.

Respectfully,

Lies Told by Moms Demanding Action

Click
here
to learn the full details of the deceptions spread by the so-called Moms Demanding Action (or rather Moms Demanding Gun
Bans).

* There is a great line in the movie Legally Blonde that applies here. As this movie was one of my younger step-daughter’s favorite movies, I learned some quotes from the movie along the way.

“Whoever said orange is the new pink was seriously disturbed” – Elle Woods

Good News Out Of Illinois

The Illinois Senate today passed SB 836 which contains improvements in the FOID Card Act, the Concealed Carry Act, and the Criminal Code. The vote was 43 yea, 8 nay, and 5 not voting. Included in the nay votes was perennial gun prohibitionist Sen. Dan Kotowski (D-Park Ridge). This is not surprising in that he had been the Executive Director of the Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence (sic) prior to being elected to the Illinois Senate.

The bill had passed the Illinois House on Saturday. The vote there was 84 yea, 23 nay, and 3 not voting. The bill now goes to Gov. Bruce Rauner (R-IL) for his signature. It is expected that he will sign this bill.

The full text of the bill is here. The Illinois State Rifle Association emailed this summary of the main provisions of the bill this evening. They along with Illinois Carry and other gun rights groups in Illinois fought hard for this bill.

After months of working with the Illinois General Assembly on improvements to the Firearms Concealed Carry Act, FOID Act and Criminal Code, SB 836 passed the Illinois Senate with a vote of 43 Yes, 8 No and 5 Present. It is on the way to the Governor’s desk.

SB 836 contains the following changes:

Firearms Concealed Carry Act:

1. Limits the waiver of privacy rights regarding the concealed carry application to only those records pertinent to obtaining a concealed carry license.

2. Clarifies that if a concealed carry licensee presents their ICCL during a law enforcement investigative stop that it is presumed they are carrying a firearm.

3. Clarifies the definition of a “mental disability” as it pertains to persons seeking a concealed carry license.

4. Eliminates the requirement that a licensee unload his or her firearm when storing or retrieving a firearm from the trunk of their vehicle.

5. Provides that Emergency Service personnel may ask anyone lawfully carrying a firearm to secure the firearm for the duration of the contact.

6. Changes mental health reporting requirements.

FOID Act:

7. Allows the use of a concealed carry license when purchasing firearms or ammunition.

8. Allows concealed carry licensees to possess firearms and ammunition without being in physical possession of their FOID card.

9. Changes the FOID Act to ensure that non-resident competitors may purchase firearms and ammunition at events held at the World Shooting Complex.

Criminal Code:

10. Eliminates a contradiction between Concealed Carry Act and the criminal definition of unlawful use of weapon.

Bleg: Any Social Network Analysis Experts Out There?

I read an article last year about the use of social network analysis to find linkages. The article was by sociologist Kieran Healy of Duke University. It was discussing how the British in 1772 Boston could have used metadata against growing rebel movement. Using membership in various organizations, Healy found that the key person linking all the groups was Paul Revere. The article was written to illustrate just how such metadata as that collected by the NSA could be used.

Healy’s article got me to thinking about how we in the gun rights movement could use social network analysis to map out the gun prohibitionists and their networks. While we all know about Michael Bloomberg and his money, what if there is someone else who actually plays the same role as Paul Revere in linking the various groups. I hesitate to call it a movement as gun control is a top down phenomenon and not one from the grassroots.

As a secondary project, I think this type of research could also be used to map out the legal networks that are supporting the Brady Center and its Legal Action Project among other organizations. Actually, that may be the place to start as the dataset would be smaller.

I know there is tons of software out there that allows social scientists to do the analysis. I have found Gelphi which is free as is UCINET and SocNetV. While I would like free, cheap would also do. Does anyone have suggestions about the software? Along those same lines, are there books or articles you’d suggest to give me a grounding in social network analysis?

Second, what factors would you use in the analysis? Name and current organization are obvious. Would you use education, former organizational members, e.g., Obama for America, or some other factor?

Third, what would you use as a source of information? I’m thinking the gun prohibitionists’ websites, LinkedIn, and Google.

Finally, how would your organize the database and how would you enter the data?

If there is someone already doing such research, do you know of it and could you put me in touch with that person or person?

Any help here would be greatly appreciated. Please leave a comment below or email me at jpr9954 AT gmail DOT com.

UPDATE: Hognose at WeaponsMan blog has begun significant work on mapping out the gun control network. His latest post on it is here. A pdf of the network is here.

Given that, I think I will be restricting my work to the gun controllers’ legal network of big law firms, the Brady Center, the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence (sic), and personal injury lawyers. There is more than enough there to get a good start.

Going Old School

I came across this comparison of the Colt SP1 and the Colt Sporter Target Model today. Basically, it was a shooting comparison of the A1 versus the A2. This interests me because I am gathering parts to put together a retro semi-auto version of the M16A1 using a combination of new and vintage parts. I also have a Colt A2 upper that I plan to build on later. More on those in a later post.

The video below is from the Military Arms Channel. They were trying to determine which rifle would give tighter groups with 55-grain 5.56 ammo. The SP1 (aka A1) had the 1:12 twist barrel while the Sporter Target Model (aka A2) has the 1:7 twist barrel.  They were using Wolf Gold ammo.

I wonder if he would have gotten better results if he had used something like American Eagle/Federal XM193 5.56 ammo.

More Problems For The King Of The Bad Apple Lawyers

Jonathan Lowy, director of the Brady Center’s Legal Action Project, has run into more problems in Wisconsin. Just last month he and fellow Brady Center attorney Alla Lefkowitz were forced to withdraw from one of their “Bad Apple” lawsuits for violating Wisconsin Supreme Court rules. These rules dealt with attorney conduct with respect to pretrial publicity.

Now it appears that he may have done it again in the other case involving Badger Guns and Badger Outdoors.

Now an attorney for Badger Guns and Badger Outdoors, the West Milwaukee gun-selling operations sued by the officers, wants the Brady attorneys off the second case, citing in a new court filing “zealous and unethical trial publicity.”

A hearing on whether the Brady attorneys will be removed from the case is set for July before Milwaukee County Circuit Judge John DiMotto, who is now presiding over both cases. This second case was filed by Officer Jose Lopez III and former Officer Alejandro Arce, who were injured in a 2007 shooting by weapons sold by the gun dealer.

Brady attorneys Jonathan Lowy and Alla Lefkowitz are not licensed to practice law in Wisconsin, but were allowed to join both cases —as they have in cases across the country litigated by Brady. Milwaukee attorney Patrick Dunphy also represents the officers and former officers.

The permission that allows an out-of-state attorney on a case can be rescinded, and the attorneys for Badger Guns and Badger Outdoors are seeking a court order withdrawing the permission.

“The Brady Center’s conduct is inexcusable,” Brookfield attorney Wendy Gunderson wrote in a brief filed earlier this month. “Attorneys appearing before Wisconsin courts are here as a matter of privilege and charged with knowing the rules. The privilege has been abused, seriously affecting not only these two cases but countless others.”

Ms. Gunderson said the material posted by Lowy on the Brady Campaign website and in fundraising letters about Badger Guns with regard to the earlier case also could serve to prejudice the jury in this case. Gunderson submitted copies of the social media and fund raising letters to the court in a sealed filing.

Jonathan Lowy is one of the attorneys that I plan to feature in my “Bad Apple Lawyers” series. I am still gathering material regarding Lowy. Given his position as head of the Legal Action Project, Lowy must be considered the King of the Bad Apple Lawyers.