Uncategorized

Uncategorized

Republicans Are Bigger Killers

December 6, 2013 by 1 Comment

I haven’t gone all lefty and joined with Ladd over at CSGV. I promise! Actually, I’m referring to a story in the Madison, Wisconsin Capital Times about the deer hunting prowess of the Republicans in the Wisconsin State Senate as compared to that of the Democrats.

Republicans in the Wisconsin state Senate had the magic touch this deer hunting season, bagging more deer than their colleagues in the Assembly and all their Democratic colleagues combined.

Of the 18 Senate Republicans, Terry Moulton of Chippewa Falls, Dale Schultz of Richland Center, Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald of Juneau, Richard Gudex of Fond du Lac, Sheila Harsdorf of River Falls, Neal Kedzie of Elkhorn and Paul Farrow of Pewaukee went hunting over the eight-day gun deer season that ended Dec. 1.

Fitzgerald, Harsdorf, Kedzie and Gudex each got a deer.

“I guess we’re a better shot,” joked Gudex, who bagged an 8-point buck on opening day.

Of the Democrats in both the Senate and Assembly, none were successful this year.

I do like the comments of Rep. Dianne Hesselbein (D-Middleton) as to why she went hunting for the first time and on her experience.

A freshman lawmaker elected in 2012, Hesselbein told herself if she was made a member of the Assembly Natural Resources and Sporting Heritage Committee, she would go deer hunting.

She was, so she did. She borrowed a 20-gauge shotgun and practiced shooting at the Dane County range. But the only animal she saw in the woods was a squirrel. She said she was surprised by the fact that she enjoyed the experience.

“You have to be so quiet. You can’t even check email,” Hesselbein said. “You just get to sit and look at the beauty of Wisconsin.”

Uncategorized

Happy Repeal Day!

December 6, 2013 by 1 Comment

Repeal Day commemorates the repeal of prohibition when the 21st Amendment was ratified on December 5, 1933. Somewhat ironically, it was the state of Utah that put ratification of the 21st Amendment over the top.

On December 5th, 1933, Utah, the final state needed for a three quarters majority, ratified the 21st Amendment, repealing Prohibition and restoring the American right to a celebratory drink. While the amendment still allowed for state and local levels of Prohibition, by 1966 there were no state laws banning alcohol.

 The libertarian Reason TV produced a video on George Cassiday who was Congress’ favorite bootlegger in celebration of Repeal Day 2012. Mr. Cassiday even had an office in both the House and Senate Office Buildings.

So on this Repeal Day, if you indulge in adult beverages, celebrate this country coming to its senses.

Uncategorized

Marty Daniels – “Maybe I Should Throw The Challenge Flag”

December 4, 2013 by 1 Comment

Marty Daniels of Daniels Defense talked with Cam Edwards yesterday about the NFL’s rejection of the Daniels Defense Superbowl ad.

Daniels discussed how they approached the Fox affiliate in Atlanta about running their ad during the Superbowl and how the NFL responded with an unequivocal no even after Daniels offered to remove the company’s log. He noted that the local NBC affiliate in Georgia ran their ad during last year’s Superbowl with some hesitancy but they ran it.

Daniels says he is a bit amazed at the response the NFL’s rejection of his company’s ad has generated. He has heard from a number of people who are outraged at the sheer hypocrisy of the NFL and wonder what happened to their country.

He concludes with a bit of humor saying maybe he ought to throw the challenge flag and ask the NFL to review the “ruling on the field”.

Lest it be forgotten, the NFL allowed ads from Mayor Bloomberg’s Illegal Mayors during the 2012 and 2013 Superbowls.

Uncategorized

Are Not Southern Law Schools Good Enough?

December 4, 2013 by 5 Comments

Gideon’s Promise is a non-profit in Atlanta that trains and pushes for public defenders throughout the South. I can find nothing wrong with that goal as I believe every defendant is entitled to competent defense counsel regardless of whether he or she can pay for it. That was the basis of the famed Supreme Court case of Gideon v. Wainwright.

They have recently initiated a program to place recent law school graduates in public defender’s offices in the South. The program is called the Law School Partnership Project. The law school funds a recent graduate of their school for one year in a public defender’s office and the office, in turn, commits to hire that person for a permanent position. The new lawyer will also get three years of training and mentorship from Gideon’s Promise under their Core 101 program. The program has received a $1 million grant from the DOJ to help it get off the ground.

So far, this is all well and good. Where I have problems with it is that the law schools involved so far are not in the South.

From the National Law Journal:

The new Law School Partnership Project so far has three law schools lined up: The University of California at Los Angeles School of Law; New York University School of Law; and American University Washington College of Law.

“The vital work of improving the quality of public defense is completely consistent with the law school’s mission of pursuing access to justice for all,” said American law dean Claudio Grossman. “This partnership will create a concrete pathway between law students and public defense work upon graduation and will be a significant service to communities in need.”

This is just what the South needs: lawyers from New York and California coming here to show the provincials how it is done.

Why not recruit graduates of such well ranked law schools as Duke, UVa, Vanderbilt, or Texas? They are all ranked ahead of UCLA in the US News & World Report law school rankings. And when it comes to American University’s Washington College of Law, I count an additional 16 Southern law schools that are more highly ranked than it.

Frankly, if I were on trial in Jackson or Birmingham or Memphis, I’m not sure I’d want some young lawyer parachuted in from LA or New York City wearing a blue seersucker suit (because that is what they think everyone practicing law in the South wears) defending me before a local jury.

I hope Gideon’s Promise makes a serious effort to bring Southern law schools into the program. Then, and only then, would I give it my full support.

Uncategorized

NSSF’s Lawsuit Against Connecticut’s SB 1160 Dismissed

December 4, 2013 by 2 Comments

Chief District Court Judge Janet Hall dismissed the National Shooting Sports Foundation’s lawsuit which sought an injunction against Connecticut’s new gun control law on Monday. Hall, a Clinton appointee, dismissed the case under Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Procedure which states that a plaintiff must have standing to bring a case. She agreed with the State of Connecticut’s claim that the NSSF did not have standing to challenge SB 1160.

The case which was brought in July of this year sought to have Connecticut’s draconian gun control law – SB 1160 – invalidated because the state did not follow its own legislative rules when it claimed an “emergency certification” exemption. Normally a bill in Connecticut must be available to be read by state legislators for two legislative days before it can be voted upon. An exemption can be granted in emergency situations if the Speaker of the House and the Senate President Pro Tem certify in writing the necessity for the emergency exemption along with the supporting facts. In this case while they did certify the emergency they failed to state any facts to support their certification. (See items 18 through 33 in the plaintiff’s complaint.)

Judge Hall states that the NSSF would have standing to challenge the gun control law’s impact on its members but not to challenge the defects in the legislative process that led to the bill being passed. She found that the NSSF’s complaint was a “generally available grievance against government” which other courts have found not to confer standing.

Here,
the
claimed
pecuniary injury
make
s
NSSF a
proper party to
challenge gun control legislation. That injury, however,
does
not make
NSSF
—
or any
other
member of the public
aggrieved
only incidentally
by
procedurally defective
legislation
—
into a proper party to challenge
the
defects
in legislative process.

Judge Hall goes on to say:

Because
the pecuniary injury asserted as the basis for NSSF‟s standing is
unrelated to
the rights of democratic participation in the legislative process that NSSF
seeks to vindicate, the court lacks the authority to adjudicate the
claims put forward in
this
case
. Accordingly,
the case must be dismissed
for lack of standing.

She concludes by granting the state’s motion to dismiss and by stating that based upon the NSSF’s written and oral pleadings that they “would be unable to replead to satisfy the standing requirement.”

The NSSF is reportedly studying the decision and weighing its options.

Uncategorized

Day By Day Nails OFA And Their Blood Dancing

December 4, 2013 by

Chris Muir of Day by Day Cartoon nails Obama’s continuing campaign arm Organizing for Action which is encouraging people to hold “Newtown anniversary events”.

These ghoulish events are meant to push Obama’s gun control agenda reports The Hill.

Organizing for Action (OFA) says it intends the events to be a “powerful reminder of what we lost a year ago, and a reminder that we as a nation need to do more to prevent gun violence and keep our communities safe.”

OFA says that the events will be held in towns and cities across the country and will be used to “call on Congress to finally take action to make our communities safer.”

Following the mass shooting that left 20 schoolchildren and six school employees dead, Obama called for legislation that would expand background checks on firearm purchases, create new penalties on straw purchases and include new funding for school security.

Noting that The Hill characterized OFA as Obama’s “campaign arm”, Glenn Reynolds said “it’s super-creepy that a term-limited president has one.” To me, OFA seems like something one might have seen in Mao’s China, Hitler’s Germany, or Mussolini’s Italy. In other words, an organization whose sole purpose is to be an extra-governmental, extra-political party organization providing cult-like followers to the man in power. That goes beyond creepy in my opinion; that is scary.

Courtesy of Chris Muir

Uncategorized

It’s Time To Win Some Guns

December 4, 2013 by

Aaron at the Weapon-Blog has posted his monthly list of contests offering guns, ammo, knives, or trips.

Among the pistols are Springfields, Glocks, custom 1911s, and a Beretta Nano. Meanwhile, the list of long arms include seven ARs, a number of bolt action rifles, a Henry Big Boy, and a Browning Maxus shotgun.

Please keep Aaron and his family in your prayers as he lost a son last month. That he still takes the time to put this list up is remarkable.

Uncategorized

House Votes To Extend Undetectable Firearms Act Of 1988

December 3, 2013 by 7 Comments

The House of Representatives passed HR 3626 – an extension of 10 years to the Undetectable Firearms Act of 1988 – on a voice vote.

From the Office of the Clerk’s Floor Proceedings:

1:12:15 P.M. H.R. 3626
Mr. Coble moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill. H.R. 3626 — “To extend the Undetectable Firearms Act of 1988 for 10 years.”
1:12:25 P.M. H.R. 3626
Considered under suspension of the rules.
1:12:28 P.M. H.R. 3626
DEBATE – The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 3626.
1:22:22 P.M. H.R. 3626
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.

Fox News reports that Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) wants to go further than just the renewal.

Some Democrats, though, want to go further and require the metal components to be a permanent part of the gun. Right now, the metal parts on such weapons can snap on and snap off.


While the House plans to vote on the basic renewal Tuesday afternoon, Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said he will seek fast approval of a measure renewing the ban and tightening the restrictions when the Democratic-run Senate returns from a two-week Thanksgiving break next Monday, the day before the ban expires. His office says the current bill leaves in place a “dangerous loophole.”

Neither the NRA which was neutral on renewal nor the NSSF which was in favor of renewal support any of the additional measures.

A clean renewal was the best we could hope for given all the hysteria on the issue from the gun prohibitionists and their allies in the media. Of course, the horse has left the barn and the plans to make such a plastic firearm are now in cyberspace.

UPDATE: Below is the NRA-ILA’s comment on the bill and their opposition to any expansion of the UFA by the Senate.

With the expiration of the so-called Undetectable Firearms Act (UFA) rapidly approaching on December 9th, misinformation over this issue and NRA’s position on it has unfortunately reached a heightened level.

We would like to make our position clear. The NRA strongly opposes ANY expansion of the Undetectable Firearms Act, including applying the UFA to magazines, gun parts, or the development of new technologies. The NRA has been working for months to thwart expansion of the UFA by Senator Chuck Schumer and others. We will continue to aggressively fight any expansion of the UFA or any other proposal that would infringe on our Second Amendment rights.

Unlike the Schumer proposal, the vote today in the U.S. House of Representatives on H.R. 3626, sponsored by Rep. Howard Coble, is a simple 10-year reauthorization — NOT an expansion — of current law. Other than extending the sunset date, H.R. 3626 makes no changes whatsoever to the underlying act.

Some groups have been circulating misinformation in order to create confusion over today’s House vote. To be clear, Rep. Coble’s bill DOES NOT expand current law in any way, as Sen. Schumer’s proposal would do.

Again, the NRA strongly opposes any expansion of the Undetectable Firearms Act. By simply reauthorizing current law, however, H.R. 3626 does not expand the UFA in any way.

Uncategorized

Gun Sales Are Seeking A New Normal

December 3, 2013 by

The National Shooting Sports Foundation has released its adjusted-NICS figures for the month of November 2013.  It shows a drop of 14.2% from November 2012. 

The November 2013 NSSF-adjusted National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) figure of 1,308,100 is a decrease of 14.2 percent compared to the NSSF-adjusted NICS figure of 1,525,177 in November 2012. For comparison, the unadjusted November 2013 NICS figure of 1,805,759 reflects a 9.6 percent decrease from the unadjusted NICS figure of 1,997,703 in November 2012. NSSF-adjusted NICS for November 2013 is the second highest on record — an 18.8% increase over November 2011.

In many ways this really shouldn’t be surprising. While the peak in November 2012 was pre-Newtown, it reflects the uncertainty for gun owners of another presidential term for Barack Obama. If you look in the chart below of the adjusted NICS checks for the month of November going back to year 2000, you see definite spikes in 2008 and 2012.

 As I wrote last month, gun sales as reflected in the adjusted-NICS checks are trending towards a new normal. They are coming off their post-Newtown peaks but are still at a much higher overall level than they were pre-Newtown. Firearms manufacturers are still trying to catch up with the demand and are working through their backlog of orders. Tom Taylor of Mossberg confirmed this last Sunday on Tom Gresham’s Gun Talk in the first hour of the show.

NICS checks are an indicator of trends in gun sales but are not perfectly correlated with them. This is because many states use the NICS database for initial and continuing checks on their concealed carry permit holders. Moreover, in many states such as North Carolina, a concealed handgun permit substitutes for a NICS check.

Uncategorized

BOLO

December 2, 2013 by 7 Comments

BOLO is an acronym often used by law enforcement to mean “be on the lookout”. It is often used by cops (or cop shows) to mean a stolen car or a criminal suspect. If you are a concealed carry permit holder living or visiting North Carolina, I might suggest another thing to be on the lookout for.

This is all that is required to post a store or restaurant against the carrying of firearms. While other states may require more explicit or more extensive measures to post a premises, North Carolina does not. Carrying a firearm on a posted premises is a Class 1 misdemeanor in North Carolina.

It seems that not only are the gun prohibitionists trying to encourage owners to post their premises but some of their activists are taking it upon themselves to “unofficially” post the business. Sean Sorrentino at An NC Gun Blog has the full story of a business in Greensboro that was “posted” by one of these activists.

Fortunately, the gun owner who was buying dinner at this establishment questioned why they had “posted” their premises. Not only had the business not done this but by going through their security tapes they were able to identify the anti-gun activist who had done it.

My suggestion if you do see one of these decals on the door of your favorite store or restaurant is to ask to speak to the management. It may turn out that they aren’t anti-gun but rather are victims of a hoax perpetrated by gun prohibitionists. If so, I’d suggest contacting Grass Roots North Carolina with the information. Their contact info is here.

And if the business is really posting their premises and is anti-gun, report that information to GRNC’s High Risk Restaurant Project.