Uncategorized

Uncategorized

Gura Appeals The Fee Award In The Heller Case

February 23, 2012 by 4 Comments

The Legal Times is reporting that Alan Gura and Clark Neily have filed notice of appeal with the Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit. They are appealing Judge Emmet Sullivan’s award of only $1.17 million in fees for the Heller case.

Last December, U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan said Gura is entitled to $1.17 million in fees and nearly $4,900 in expenses. Sullivan rejected Gura’s request for more than $3.12 million in fees and expenses.

“Sensitive to the fact that the fees in this case will be paid by the taxpayers, this Court is left with the difficult task of closely scrutinizing plaintiff’s fee petition to determine what is fair, reasonable, and just compensation for the legal services of plaintiff’s attorneys,” Sullivan said in his decision.

Judge Sullivan in setting the lower hourly fee for the attorneys who represented Dick Heller and the rest of the original plaintiffs agreed with DC’s contention that small firms should command lower fees than the mega-firms. He also rejected the contention of Alan Gura that a fee enhancement was due to the plaintiffs’ attorney for “superior lawyering” saying, in part,

Finally, the Court is not persuaded that plaintiff’s success in this action was attributable to the superior lawyering of his counsel. As plaintiff is well aware, “superior results are relevant [to a request for a fee enhancement] only to the extent it can be shown that they are the result of superior attorney performance.” See Perdue, 130 S. Ct. at 1674. In this case, the Court finds that the lawyering on both sides was excellent. The Court therefore concludes that plaintiff has failed to present this Court with the specific evidence necessary to overcome the “strong presumption” that the lodestar figure is reasonable.

I guess winning only the second case that dealt directly with the Second Amendment and changing the course of Second Amendment jurisprudence in the process doesn’t count.

By filing the appeal, Gura and Neily are seeking a second opinion as to the reasonableness of their request. While Gura was not available for comment, Clark Neily had this to say:

Neily said in an e-mail that “settlement discussions between the Heller’s legal team and the District of Columbia are ongoing, and we have filed our notice of appeal in order to preserve all available options.”

I’ve always held the District of Columbia City Council were a bunch of cheap bastards in dragging out their payment to Alan Gura and the rest. And I think Judge Sullivan is dead wrong in his assessment that superior lawyering didn’t win the case for Dick Heller.

Uncategorized

Quote Of The Day

February 23, 2012 by

The quote of the day comes from Tam. After driving past dead strip malls and boarded-up restaurants, she notes that the stock market has rallied on news of (another) Greek bailout.

Meanwhile, the TeeWee talking heads are cooing at the Dow passing 13,000 again. Investors, they say, are excited about yet another Greek bailout. Let me get this straight: Germany has taken out another cash advance on its maxed-out credit card and given it to its deadbeat cousin, Greece, who swears that this time they’ll use the money to get a haircut and a job, instead of wasting it on hookers and blow again, and investors take this as a good sign?

Every time I hear the words “Leading economic indicators are…” come out of a newscaster’s mouth these days, I expect them to be followed by “…from the planet Mars.”

As a ,  I have to say I agree with Tam. Despite the mainstream media playing up the spurious numbers coming out of the Obama Administration, I don’t see glad tidings on the horizon either.

Uncategorized

Why Do I Not Trust This?

February 22, 2012 by 3 Comments

The George Mason University Center for Evidence-Based Crime Policy is holding what a “Congressional Briefing” today in the Rayburn House Office Building on the topic of “Reducing Gun Violence” (sic).

Our upcoming Congressional Briefing, Reducing Gun Violence: Lessons from Research and Practice, will be held on Wednesday, February 22, 2012 and led by Dr. Christopher Koper, Associate Professor in the Department of Criminology, Law and Society.

Briefing Summary: This event will feature several leading firearms experts from criminology, economics, and public health who will discuss the findings and policy implications of current research on gun violence patterns, illegal gun markets, and the effects of policies and practices to prevent gun violence. The briefing will also address needs and future directions for research that can inform efforts to address this costly problem.

 Maybe the reason I am so skeptical of the whole thing is because of their speakers. When you see the names Jens Ludwig, Garen Wintemute, and Daniel Webster of the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research, red flags appear immediately. Add to this a series of Tweets by the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence (sic) about the research being presented and you know that those red flags are justified.

Their agenda lists such presentations as Daniel Webster’s “Firearm Seller Accountability Measures and the Diversion of Guns to Criminals” and Jens Ludwig’s “Underground Gun Markets”.

The Center presenting this is headed by Dr. Christopher Koper, formerly of U. Penn’s Firearm and Injury Center, who lists among his current research a study being funded by the Joyce Foundation.

Need I say anything more?

Uncategorized

If They Are Going To Call Us Insurrectionists, Might As Well Get The T-Shirt

February 22, 2012 by 3 Comments

The gun prohibitionists love to characterize those of us who care about our Second Amendment rights as “insurrectionists”. This is especially true of Ladd Everitt and Josh Horwitz of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence (sic).

Frankly, if standing up for one’s Constitutional rights makes one an “insurrectionist” then I wear their epithet proudly. So proudly in fact that I bought the T-shirt.

The quotation on the shirt is from Thomas Jefferson and reads, “The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” That works for me.

The T-shirt is available from Gadsden and Culpepper in black and coyote for $12 plus shipping.

And for the FTC bureaucrats who have too much time on their hands, my only relationship with Gadsden and Culpepper is as a customer and I bought my coyote Militia of One T-shirt at retail.

Uncategorized

More On The Budget Cuts For The Federal Flight Deck Officer Program

February 22, 2012 by

Cam Edwards of NRA News interviewed Mike Karn of the Federal Flight Deck Officers Association and Coalition of Airline Pilots Associations on Monday about the budget cuts for the FFDO program. Karn made some interesting points about the program and its cost efficiency.

First, each pilot who enrolls in the program spends approximately $10,000 of their own money to participate.

Second, these cuts would mean no new pilots would be enrolled in the program and it calls into question what happens when they have to requalify.

Third, having multiple layers of defense against terrorists and air pirates works better than the Maginot Line defense that the TSA proposes (my words.)

Finally, it costs about $15 per flight to have a FFDO on board versus about $3,000 to protect the flight with an Air Marshall.

Uncategorized

In California, Much Ado About Nothing

February 22, 2012 by 4 Comments

The Humane Society of the United States’ California branch is all bent out of shape because the President of the California Fish and Game Commission, Dan Richards, went mountain lion hunting in Idaho. While mountain lion hunting has been prohibited in California since 1990, it is perfectly legal in Idaho where Mr. Richards also owns a cabin. Indeed, California is the only state from the Rockies to the Pacific that bans hunting of mountain lions. The prohibition that began in 1990 was not the result of scientific study by wildlife biologists but rather the result of Proposition 117.

Mr. Richards had posted this picture and story in the Western Outdoor News about his hunting trip to Idaho.

NEW COMMISSION PRESIDENT CELEBRATES A SUCCESSFUL HUNT – California Fish and Game commissioner Dan W. Richards travelled deep into the wicked terrain of Idaho’s Flying B Ranch to fulfill a long-held goal. “It was the most physically exhausting hunt of my lifetime. Eight hours of cold weather hiking in very difficult terrain. I told the guides I appreciated the hard work. They were unbelievably professional, first class all the way,” he said. Richards said he took the big cat over iron sights using a Winchester Centennial lever action .45 carbine. Asked about California’s mountain lion moratorium, Richards didn’t hesitate. “I’m glad it’s legal in Idaho.”

Photo courtesy of Dan Richards

This prompted the Humane Society of the US-California chapter to start a campaign to get Mr. Richards removed. They posted this on their Facebook page:

Posing with this dead mountain lion is California’s new Fish and Game commission president Dan Richards. Since mountain lions are protected in our state, he went to Idaho to bag this trophy. As a hunter friend of mine said when he saw this photo, “That’s not right. You don’t kill what you don’t eat.” I agree. If you do too, drop a (polite) email to the folks at the Fish and Game Commission and ask for a new president: http://www.fgc.ca.gov/contact/

Dan Richards is what these so-called environmental and animal rights groups hate – a Republican hunter who is a life member of the NRA who refuses to bend to their will.

A San Bernardino County Republican appointed to the five-member commission by former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2008, Richards has been its most outspoken advocate for expanding hunting, often clashing with environmental and animal welfare groups.

As president, Richards can set the commission’s agenda on a range of issues including endangered species protections, ocean fishing rules and all types of hunting regulation from rabbits to black bears. If he were to bring the dead mountain lion back to California from Idaho, he would be in violation of state law.

As such, given our new political climate, he must be destroyed. Unfortunately, they have willing allies in the media and with certain Democratic legislators. The news report below, while it emphasizes the hunt was legal, devotes most of its time to Jennifer Fearing of HSUS-California. Ms. Fearing has compared Richards’ legal hunt to an American drug czar using drugs in a country where it was legal.

And, according to a report in the Mercury News, Assemblyman Jared Huffman, D-San Rafael, chairman of the Assembly Water, Parks and Wildlife Committee, may introduce a resolution in the California Assembly to have Richards removed. Richards cannot be removed by Gov. Jerry Brown but can be removed from office by a majority vote of both houses of the California legislature.

“He’s thumbing his nose at California law,” Huffman said. “He’s mocking it. Frankly, I think he should face the music and step down. He’s done something that’s a disgrace to his position and to responsible hunters in California.”

The comments by Assemblyman Huffman are a joke. What Mr. Richards did would be the equivalent of me going to the Rockies to hunt elk. While elk have been reintroduced to the Smoky Mountains, they are a protected species.

The mountain lion or cougar is an apex predator. While humans may be above it in the predatory hierarchy, as many reports show, the mountain lion will attack humans. They are not the big kitty that fears man and just wants to be left to live its life in peace as the anti-hunting groups would have you believe.

I, for one, shed no false tears of moral outrage over Dan Richards killing a mountain lion after a long and arduous hunt. Rather I would congratulate him on his successful hunt and nice trophy.

UPDATE: The Outdoor Wire today published an editorial from Bill Karr of the Western Outdoor News in response to the HSUS campaign to remove Dan Richards. It is an excellent read and points out that Jennifer Fearing of the HSUS-California is nothing but a carpetbagger. She arrived in California 3 years ago from the DC headquarters of HSUS. Other animal rights activists are siding with Richards on this one.

This all comes from two people, and an organization, that has had no physical presence in California whatsoever until the past few years. The HSUS headquarters is in Washington, D.C., and that is, in fact, where the California head of HSUS, Jennifer Fearing, came from just 3 years ago to try and influence California politics. And the crying shame is, they found some success with the gullible, left-leaning California majority.

It seems to me, though, that HSUS has gone way out on a limb with this one, though. Even other animal rights activists disagree with HSUS. In comments to the San Jose Mercury News, Eric Mills, Coordinator for Action for Animals out of Oakland had this to say about Richards: “The anger here is misplaced. Commissioner Dan Richards did nothing illegal. Mountain lion hunting is not against the law in Idaho. Nor was this a ‘canned’ hunt, as some have claimed. Dan Richards is not the enemy. He’s an avid outdoorsman, hunter and fisherman, which has been well-known for years. No one has a right to be surprised by this hunt.”

Mills even went so far as to say “I’ve found him to be honest, thoughtful, articulate, fair and outspoken.”

Uncategorized

I’ve Done My Part – Have You?

February 21, 2012 by

The team over at Ammo.net has come up with a great infographic showing the rise in gun and ammo sales for the past few years. It is part of a report called “The Greatest Gun Salesman In America: President Barack Obama.” With this sort of success, you’d think Obama would be touting his contribution to the growth of a $4 billion industry but, of course, he hasn’t.

The Greatest Gun Salesman In America: President Barack Obama [INFOGRAPHIC]
Via: Ammo.net

Uncategorized

A Review Of The Mossberg MVP

February 21, 2012 by 1 Comment

The Mossberg MVP rifle caught my eye at the 2011 NRA Annual Meeting. Like the Ruger Gunsite Scout, it is a bolt-action rifle that uses detachable magazines. Unlike the Ruger, the MVP takes off-the-shelf AR-15 magazines. Later this year, Mossberg is supposed to release a shorter barreled Scout version of the MVP. Not that I need another rifle in .223 or even another varmint rifle but this one intrigues me.

This video review is from the Kentucky Gun Company. I don’t know these folks but they seem to do a good job reviewing the rifle. I just wish they didn’t have their store logo cluttering up the screen so much.

One thing that caught my eye was the difference in the grouping of the Prvi Partisan ammo versus the Remington UMC. I think I’ll be buying some of the Prvi Partisan to test out.

Uncategorized

Cutting The Federal Flight Deck Officer Program Because TSA Is So Good?

February 20, 2012 by 7 Comments

In the FY 2013 Federal Budget, the Obama Administration proposes to cut $13 million from the Federal Flight Deck Officer program. This is the program which trains those airline pilots that volunteer and qualify to be armed in the cockpit. The current funding for FY 2012 is $25 million.

The justification for this cut is that improvements in TSA procedures have “enhanced” airline security to the point where the FFDO program is barely needed.

Justification

The Administration proposes to reduce funding for the FFDO program (i.e., deputized, armed pilots) in 2013. As the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) focuses its aviation security activities on programs that mitigate the highest amount of risk at the lowest cost, the Budget has prioritized funding in the same manner. The voluntary FFDO program was created as a “last defense” layer of security at a time when comprehensive aviation screening and other physical security measures were not fully developed or deployed on a system-wide basis. Since 2001, however, there have been a number of enhancements to aviation security. TSA now conducts 100 percent screening of all passengers and their carryon items, has overseen installation of reinforced and locking cockpit doors on aircraft that operate in U.S. airspace, and has increased passenger and flight crew awareness to address security risks. Combined, these improvements have greatly lowered the chances of unauthorized cockpit access and represent a comprehensive and redundant risk-mitigation strategy that begins well before passengers board the aircraft.

Are we talking about the same TSA? The one that engages in security kabuki theater while a number of its agents have been found to have been stealing from checked luggage including firearms. If they are corrupt enough to steal, they are corrupt enough to be able to be bribed by terrorists.

If TSA has really made flying so safe, then why not go the whole distance and discontinue the FFDO program entirely? Either the program is needed or it isn’t. I, for one, think having armed flight crew is an excellent idea and more cost effective than many of the procedures currently used by TSA.