Moore V. Madigan Dismissed But Will Be Appealed

In the judicial equivalent of a Friday night document dump by the Justice Department, Judge Sue E. Myersclough released her opinion in Moore v. Madigan. This case was the challenge by the Second Amendment Foundation and Illinois Carry to the State of Illinois’ ban on carry outside the home. It was brought in U.S. District Court for the Central District of Illinois in Springfield.

Judge Myersclough denied the plaintiffs’ Motion for a Preliminary and/or Permanent Injunction and granted the defendant’s Motion to Dismiss.

Quickly summarizing her findings, Judge Myersclough found the Illinois “Unlawful Use of Weapons” and “Aggravated Unlawful Use of a Weapon” statutes do not violate the Second Amendment. She goes on to say that the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit have only recognized “a Second Amendment core individual right to bear arms inside the home.” Myersclough then says that even if the laws violated the Second Amendment, the statutes would survive constitutional scrutiny. Based on this, she didn’t think the plaintiffs’ could show a likelihood of success on the merits and therefore dismissed the case.

A Notice of Appeal to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals was filed within an hour of Judge Myersclough’s decision in this case.

I am halfway through my reading of the decision and will have more after I have had time to digest it. One thing I am looking for in her decision is an indication of how she will rule in another Second Amendment case – Mishaga v. Monken – that is before her presently.

As I wrote in a post last year regarding Judge Myersclough and the Mishaga case, she was nominated by President Obama. She had been asked whether Heller and McDonald limited handgun possession to the home and she replied that the Supreme Court left that for future evaluations. I guess we know now where she stands on that.

Historical Quote Of The Week

The historical quote of the week from Proclaiming Liberty comes Henry Campbell Black. He was the founder of Black’s Law Dictionary which is considered the definitive law dictionary.

The second amendment to the federal constitution, as well as the constitutions of many of the states, guaranty to the people the right to bear arms. This is a natural right, not created or granted by the constitutions.

  Black, Henry Campbell. Handbook of American Constitutional Law. 3rd. Ed. St. Paul: West Publishing Company, 1910. 543 Print.

This quote is found on page 52 of Proclaiming Liberty which is available from Amazon.com for $12.95. The Kindle edition is now available for $3.95.

Spent The Afternoon At A New Range

The Complementary Spouse and I spent a few hours this afternoon breaking in her new Smith and Wesson M&P 9. It was her reward for winning a bet with me that this blog would hit 500,000 visitors before the end of 2011.

We went to Bear Arms in Brevard, NC which has two indoor ranges. They have a 40-yard rifle range and a 25-yard pistol range with five bays for rifle and six for pistol. This was our first time there and I was impressed at how nice it was. At the pistol range they had plenty of room to store your extras with individual metal tables for each bay. One thing I really liked about their range setup was that they had distance markers hanging from the ceiling for each of the five target systems. Often, you are just estimating the distance based on lines on the floor.

The pistol shot well with only two or three failure to fires. It was always with some Fiocchi 130 gr. ammo so I think it was the ammo and not the pistol. The pistol digested some cheap Hungarian MFS 2000 ammo that has been problematic in certain of my pistols with no problems.

The only problem we really had was that white dot in the front sight fell out somewhere within the first 50 rounds. It didn’t impact our shooting but I was bit surprised by that.

The Complementary Spouse did well. It was her first time shooting a center-fire semi-auto and she group her shots very well. She was a little surprised by the recoil but I think over time and with more practice she’ll handle it well. The M&P had a lot of texturing to assure a firm grip. The downside was that the texturing under the trigger guard started rubbing her middle finger and she stopped shooting before it broke the skin. I think a piece of Moleskin on the trigger guard (or a bit of sanding) will take care of it in the future.

While this isn’t the closest range to us, I think it is one we’ll be going back to on a regular basis. The price was only $20 for the two of us for as long as we wanted, the pro-shop was good, they have really nice handcleaning facilities, and the couple running the shop were really nice and friendly. All in all it is a place I’d like to shoot at again.

Quote Of The Day

The quote of the day comes “Jazz Shaw” at Hotair.com who calls Mayor Michael Bloomberg the Nanny State King for his anti-smoking, anti-salt, anti-trans fat, and anti-gun efforts.

After discussing the Super Bowl ad by Mayor Mike and Mayor Mumbles (as Weer’d calls him) for their group of Illegal Mayors, he makes this comment about concealed carry in the Empire State.

It may come as a surprise to some readers to learn that you actually can get a concealed carry permit in New York legally. However I believe you’re likely to see an actual Bigfoot in the Hudson Valley before you find one of those permits.

Insurrectionist Metal

I’m sure that the head of a well-known Director of Communications for a gun prohibitionist group will explode when he sees this video from Madison Rising. After all, he says the 70s band America is one of his favorite bands and these guys are pretty far from 70s pop music.

It is called “Right To Bear” and is very pro-Second Amendment. You can find the full lyrics on Madison Rising’s website.

Thanks to Doc Wesson of the Gun Nation Podcast for featuring them on a recent podcast which allowed me to discover them.

One Heck Of A Mag Pouch

Actually, it isn’t a mag pouch. It is a backpack that integrates with a machine gun so that the machine gunner can carry up to 925 rounds of 5.56×45 or 575 rounds of 7.62×51 ammunition.

I seem to remember reading a story somewhere that some soldiers in either Afghanistan or Iraq made a prototype using scavenged parts and an old Alice pack frame.

Oh, Canada!

A guy defends himself against assailants firebombing his home and he is the one on trial? It is obvious from Cam Edward’s interview of Lorne Gunter of the National Post that the Crown Prosecutor doesn’t have a clue about guns.

Frankly, I blame the late Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau. As Justice Minister he introduced the first gun control into Canada back in late 1967. I find it interesting that both Canada and the United States introduced major gun control measures at approximately the same time. In Canada it was the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1968-69 while in the United States it was the Gun Control Act of 1968.

Fortress Holder

Infographics, if done well, are an excellent way to condense data and still make the information usable. That has been the emphasis behind the work of Edward Tufte for years.

This one from the House Oversight Committee gets the point across very well in my opinion.

Courtesy of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee

Darrell Issa’s Opening Statement For Today’s Hearing

The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee has released Chairman Darrell Issa’s prepared opening statement for today’s hearings into Operation Fast and Furious.

Chairman Issa Hearing Preview Statement

Over the past year, the ATF program known as Operation Fast and Furious has been the subject of a joint investigation by this committee and Sen. Chuck Grassley, who serves as the Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. When this investigation began, the Department of Justice took the position that allegations by whistleblowers about reckless tactics and decision making in this operation were false.

Late last year, after months of investigation, the Justice Department finally acknowledged the allegations were true. Fast and Furious was both reckless and flawed.

The Justice Department, however, has been less than forthcoming in cooperating with the efforts of Congressional investigators to determine exactly what happened and who was responsible:

• The Justice Department has delivered fewer than 8% of the 80,000 documents we know it has identified as being related to this flawed operation.

• It has refused to allow investigators access to numerous witnesses who participated in the operation – one witness, after being served with a subpoena, invoked his Fifth Amendment right to protection against self-incrimination rather than answer questions.

• Justice Department now asserts that many documents pertaining to internal discussions and decision making about its response to Operation Fast and Furious are off-limits to investigators.

The American people deserve better from our nation’s top law enforcement agency. Thursday’s hearing will feature the nation’s top law enforcement official, Attorney General Eric Holder, who will be asked to explain his decision to withhold this factual evidence from investigators. What he is concerned this information would reveal? Why is the Department trying to keep its internal discussions about Operation Fast and Furious from after February 4, 2011 secret? Why did it take nearly nine months for the Justice Department to acknowledge its earlier denials were false? Why did senior Justice Department officials who knew about and received briefings on the operation fail to stop it? Should Americans have confidence in their chief law enforcement agency even though these same officials remain in their posts?

There is now broad bipartisan agreement that the congressional investigation into Operation Fast and Furious has exposed a serious and deadly failure of government. We know that the life of a brave Border Patrol agent has been lost along with countless Mexican citizens who have been victimized by guns from Operation Fast and Furious. Attorney General Holder has acknowledged that the danger created by Fast and Furious will continue for years.

This hearing is not about controversial struggles between gun control advocates and supporters of the Second Amendment. It is about the unifying, and what should be bipartisan, expectation that the Justice Department be held to a high standard and that those who failed to meet this standard should be held accountable. I look forward to Attorney General Holder’s testimony.

Much of the hearings and much of what has been released has been about incompetence which is a start but doesn’t go far enough. I would suggest that this operation could be more accurately be considered a subversion of the Constitution. I may be jaded but I don’t think a reasonable person would conclude that such a Keystone Cops approach to the Mexican drug cartels was ever meant to work. Rather it was meant as a way to build support for greater and greater gun control measures. If one reads John Ross’ Unintended Consequences or Matthew Bracken’s Enemies Foreign and Domestic which are fiction and then compare Operation Fast and Furious to them, the similarities become downright eerie.

Mike Vanderboegh has seen the briefing paper  from the Committee titled “Main Justice: Extensive Involvement in Operation Fast and Furious.” Buried within it is evidence that leads to involvement by the FBI in parts of this operation or a concurrent operation called Operation Headshot.

So, since October the committee staff have been aware of the FBI sanitized version of the “one-armed man” and his brother who were their confidential informants, who provided the money to the straw buyers and whom the FBI have been protecting ever since Brian Terry was murdered. But does the Committee draw the obvious conclusion? Have they aggressively probed the FBI on Operation Head Shot? If this pathetic entry is any indication, no, they haven’t. The FBI, it seems, is off limits.

So now you have a troika of agencies – ATF, DEA, and FBI – involved to some degree in Project Gunwalker. Such coordination of effort among agencies doesn’t just happen without a controlling hand from above in Main Justice. This leads me again to say  this wasn’t about the cartels but rather about building the case for more gun control. This administration is the most Machiavellian since Richard Nixon and it fits their under the radar approach to these issues.