Uncategorized

Uncategorized

Daily Star Or Red Star?

February 22, 2011 by 1 Comment

The Arizona Daily Star of Tucson has an editorial today calling for a reinstatement of the ban on “military-style assault weapons”.

Banning semiautomatic assault weapons designed to kill lots of people quickly isn’t quite as simple at it may appear on the surface. That must not keep us from trying.

In fact, even given myriad defects in the now-expired federal assault-weapons ban, we could do a lot worse than essentially reinstating it as originally written. Flawed though it was, it reduced the flow of such weapons.

Even better, Congress should consider emulating California’s assault-weapons ban.

According to the Daily Star, the California law has a one military feature and its banned. Frankly, I don’t know if they are correct or not as I haven’t had to deal with the California law. I do know that the good folks at CalGuns.net can tell you all about “bullet buttons” and other ways around the California law.

What the editorial board of the Arizona Daily Star fails to mention is that the overall crime rate has gone down since the AWB sunsetted in 2004. I guess that doesn’t fit the narrative.

UPDATE: Charles Heller of the AZ Citizens Defense League was given an opportunity to write an op-ed responding to the Daily Star. It is entitled Gun Control: Punishing the Innocent.

Uncategorized

HR 822: Concealed Carry Reciprocity Bill Introduced (Updated)

February 22, 2011 by 10 Comments

Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-FL) introduced HR 822 on Friday. It is:

To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide a national standard in accordance with which nonresidents of a State may carry concealed firearms in the State.

The full text of the bill is not yet available and he hasn’t issued a press release describing the bill.

Rep. Heath Shuler (D-NC) – my Congressman – is the first co-sponsor of the bill. Whatever else I might say about Heath, he is good on the Second Amendment. You also may remember that he came out in the aftermath of the Tucson shootings saying he had a CCW permit and did carry. He also encouraged his staff to obtain a CCW permit.

I will call Shuler’s office tomorrow to see if I can get a copy of the text of the bill as it may be a few days before the Government Printing Office has it available.

UPDATE: Thanks to Paul Flusche of Congressman Cliff Stearn’s office we have the text of the bill. After a quick reading of the bill, I’d see this is a pretty good bill. If a state issues a concealed carry permit, then your CCW is good there subject to the rules for an unrestricted CCW. For example, if your home state allows you to carry in a place that serves alcohol but you are in North Carolina which doesn’t, you have to abide by the NC CHP regulations.

Here is the full text of the bill:

To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide a national standard in accordance with which nonresidents of a State may carry concealed firearms in the State.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Mr. STEARNS (for himself and Mr. SHULER) introduced the following bill;
which was referred to the Committee on (blank)

A BILL

To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide a national standard in accordance with which nonresidents of a State may carry concealed firearms in the State.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011’’.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
The Congress finds the following:
(1) The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States protects the fundamental right of an individual to keep and bear arms, including for purposes of individual self-defense.
(2) The Supreme Court of the United States has recognized this right in the case of District of Columbia v. Heller, and in the case of McDonald v. City of Chicago, has recognized that the right is protected against State infringement by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
(3) The Congress has the power to pass legislation to protect against infringement of all rights protected under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
(4) The right to bear arms includes the right to carry arms for self-defense and the defense of others.
(5) The Congress has enacted legislation of national scope authorizing the carrying of concealed firearms by qualified active and retired law enforcement officers.
(6) Forty-eight States provide by statute for the issuance to individuals of permits to carry concealed firearms, or allow the carrying of concealed
firearms for lawful purposes without the need for a permit.
(7) The overwhelming majority of individuals who exercise the right to carry firearms in their own States and other States have proven to be law-abiding, and such carrying has been demonstrated to provide crime prevention or crime resistance benefits for the licensees and for others.
(8) The Congress finds that preventing the lawful carrying of firearms by individuals who are traveling outside their home State interferes with the constitutional right of interstate travel, and harms interstate commerce.
(9) Among the purposes of this Act is the protection of the rights, privileges, and immunities guaranteed to a citizen of the United States by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
(10) The Congress, therefore, should provide for national recognition, in States that issue to their own citizens licenses or permits to carry concealed handguns, of other State permits or licenses to carry concealed handguns.

SEC. 3. RECIPROCITY FOR THE CARRYING OF CERTAIN CONCEALED FIREARMS.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 926C the following:
‘‘§ 926D. Reciprocity for the carrying of certain concealed firearms‘‘
(a) Notwithstanding any provision of the law of any State or political subdivision thereof, related to the carrying or transportation of firearms, a person who is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm, and who is carrying a government-issued photographic identification document and a valid license or permit which is issued pursuant to the law of a State and which permits the person to carry a concealed firearm, may carry a concealed handgun (other than a machinegun or destructive device) that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, in any State, other than the State of residence of the person, that—
‘‘(1) has a statute that allows residents of the State to obtain licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms; or
‘‘(2) does not prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms by residents of the State for lawful purposes.
‘‘(b) A person carrying a concealed handgun under this section shall be permitted to carry a handgun subject to the same conditions or limitations that apply to residents of the State who have permits issued by the State or are otherwise lawfully allowed to do so by the State.
‘‘(c) In a State that allows the issuing authority for licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms to impose restrictions on the carrying of firearms by individual holders of such licenses or permits, a firearm shall be carried according to the same terms authorized by an unrestricted
license or permit issued to a resident of the State.
‘‘(d) Nothing in this section shall be construed to preempt any provision of State law with respect to the issuance of licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms.’’.

(b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections for such chapter is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 926C the following:
‘‘926D. Reciprocity for the carrying of certain concealed firearms.’’.

(c) SEVERABILITY.—Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, if any provision of this section, or any amendment made by this section, or the application of such provision or amendment to any person or circumstance is held to be unconstitutional, this section and amendments made by this section and the application of such provision or amendment to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.

(d) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by this section shall take effect 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Uncategorized

That’s Hot!

February 22, 2011 by 1 Comment
 

Paris Hilton (seen above with her boyfriend Cy Waits) revealed that Waits stopped an armed burglar from getting into her home last August by pulling a gun on the intruder. Waits held the burglar at gunpoint for a half hour while they waited for police to arrive according to the story. The burglar was armed with “two large knives”.

It is not known whether Waits, a nightclub “mogul”, had one of those rare LA County concealed carry permits or just kept the pistol at Hilton’s house. The discussion about this incident on the CalGuns.net forum seems to indicate that even though Waits was not at his own residence, it was lawful for him to use a firearm to stop the armed intruder.

Neither Hilton or Waits are someone the NRA would want as a spokesperson due to run-ins with the law but I’m glad that a firearm was available for use in stopping an knife-wielding intruder. I am surprised that the LAPD took 30 minutes to get to Paris Hilton’s house given that she is a celebrity.

Uncategorized

Time To Pass CCW In Wisconsin Is Now

February 21, 2011 by

I thought you needed 20 Senators to make a quorum in the Wisconsin State Senate. You do but only for fiscal bills. According to the National Review Online, a simple majority is all that is needed for other bills.

Bringing up hot-button legislation while the Democrats are gone is another arrow in Walker’s quiver. Though the Wisconsin constitution requires three-fifths of the senate to be present to pass fiscal legislation, a simple majority of 17 members constitutes a quorum for other bills in the 33-seat state senate. So the 19 GOP senators who remain in Madison can pass any number of bills while their Democratic colleagues are on the lam, and Republicans are a majority in the assembly, too. “They can hold off, but there is a whole legislative agenda that Republicans in the senate and assembly can start acting on that only requires simple majorities,” Walker warns.“If they want to do their jobs, and have a say, they better show up.”

Non-spending bills and government appointments could see action early Tuesday. Walker says he will not yield as the standoff unfolds, especially since Wisconsin is facing a projected $3.6 billion budget shortfall over the next two years.

Gov. Scott Walker indicated during his campaign for Governor that he would sign a concealed carry bill if it were presented to him.

If you are a gun rights supporter who lives in Wisconsin, call your legislators and urge them to get to work on CCW. I doubt you could get constitutional carry to pass but you just never know. At the very least, make Wisconsin a “shall-issue” state.

Uncategorized

Ruger SP101 As A Newbie Handgun

February 21, 2011 by 3 Comments

The Truth About Guns blog has a review today of the Ruger SP101 3″ .357 Magnum. They are looking for a revolver that can be concealed that would be ideal for the new shooter.

As the Complementary Spouse and I were thinking of this same revolver as her “first” gun, I found this review very helpful. I really can’t find anything that I really disagree with in the review. While a semi-auto may in fact be the better beginner gun, Robert makes some good points about why a revolver instead of a semi-auto pistol.

There’s too much that can go wrong: loading the magazine, loading the magazine into the gun, racking the slide, remembering to rack the slide, remembering if you’ve racked the slide, remembering to deactivate a safety (where applicable), knowing when the gun is empty and knowing how to release the magazine.

And knowing how to clear the chamber, remembering to clear the chamber, keeping track of the muzzle while you reload a new magazine, remembering to reactivate the safety (where applicable), etc. Not to mention limp wristing.

The one thing I’d add to this list is that some women have a hard time racking the slide.

Now if Ruger would just do something about the rear sights… You can get rear sights installed as part of the Perfected SP101 package from revolver-smith Hamiltion Bowen. It will cost you $495 which is about what you’d pay, give or take, for the SP101.

Uncategorized

The Battle For Concealed Carry In Illinois Heats Up

February 21, 2011 by

The Illinois State Rifle Association (ISRA) posted this message earlier this morning on Facebook:

It’s been a busy week at the capitol. There have been a lot of bills filed and the gun hating antis seem to be distracted as to which way to go.

The week led off with published reports that there is major movement in the senate with the Senate President realizing the votes exists to pass RTC. Almost immediately the gun hating crowd went into a tizzy. For some time the anti-gunners have claimed very low support for RTC regardless of the fact that it failed by only two votes.

Now things are taking shape. The fact that we are just one of two states that have no opportunity for average citizens to exercise the right to self defense in public is sinking in. The fact that if nothing is done, we will be the only one, is sinking in.

The other political calculus is that downstate democrats are feeling a lot of heat over several issues and they think the only way to get a chance at re-election is to bring home RTC. This is causing them to apply pressure to their leadership. Their feeling is that many of the conservative democrats that are their base are bent out of shape and they will lose the edge if they can’t deliver Right To Carry. Those pleas are being noticed by leadership such as Senate President Cullerton.

While we fight the right to carry battle, we have introduced a number of other bills to strengthen the right to keep and bear arms and protect it further. At the same time, the City of Chicago and the gun hating crowd have re-introduced their stale package of bills to ban semi-autos, stop private sales of firearms, ban standard magazines, limit you to one gun per month, tax your ammunition and run gun dealers out of business. Mind you, some of these could pose real threats. Ending private sales, banning standard magazines and modern semi-autos are at the top of their wish list.

With the shooting in Arizona still fresh in people’s mind, they are once again trying to dance in the blood of the victims to try and move their political agenda. The problem they are having is that not many politicians are paying attention to them, and the Supreme Court has placed handcuffs on what they want to do.

Three things showed us this week what kind of a panic the other side is in;

1. A Board member for the Brady campaign barged into a conversation to make unfounded aspersions and tell us that the coming debate would be about dead children. They are just seething to have a verbal assault because the rest of their little tantrum is falling on deaf ears. So they lash out at us personally.

2. Another anti-gun Brady supporter activist came up and stated a willingness to trade away a may issue RTC for a proposal they want. Why would they offer to trade away RTC? They reached too far and are now losing their last stronghold. The fact that they are willing to deal, shows that even they see the writing on the wall — they are losing Illinois.

3. Anti-gun groups are trying to rally the troops and are bringing in outside help. The nationals are banging the gong with the revelations about Illinois. If their last hope for anti-gun-topia, the Kalifornia of the Midwest is going down like the Titanic, what do they have left?

Their future is bleak! How can they sell their gun hating ideas around the country if they lose Illinois?

What to expect;

Look for the national anti-gun groups to circle the wagons around Illinois. Look for more national figures or representatives from their groups to show up here over the next few weeks, and look for them to say or do almost anything to save face.

So what can you do?

1. Start calling your legislators and politely tell them, you oppose the Chicago gun control plan to punish law abiding citizens. A list of those bills can be found on the ISRA website

( http://www.isra.org/legislation/ ) or the Illinois Carry website (illinoiscarry.com) in their forums section.

2. Tell your legislators that you support Right To Carry and other pro-2A reforms proposed by ISRA, and NRA.

3. Attend IGOLD on March 10th so you can tell your legislators in person and those legislative leaders that it’s time to pass Right To Carry, 48 and soon to be 49 states can’t be wrong.

This will be a marathon fight this year, but one with great potential for protecting and expanding the codification of those rights that Dick Heller and Otis McDonald fought so hard for. Please do your part, call, write, and show up to be counted.

If Illinois adopts concealed carry – even a may-issue concealed carry – it would be a huge step towards re-normalizing guns in America.

I fully expect Wisconsin to pass a concealed carry law if they can ever find their missing Democrat State Senators reputed to be hiding in Illinois. As an aside, I wonder if we could commission Dog the Bounty Hunter to drag at least one of them back so they can have a quorum in the Wisconsin Senate.

Back to Illinois, one must wonder how much the end of the “reign” of Mayor Daley plays into all of this. With Daley gone or soon to be gone, how much power does he continue to wield over the Illinois General Assembly? Would we even be talking about concealed carry passing with a veto-proof majority if Daley wasn’t a lame duck? I don’t think so..

Uncategorized

Senate Judiciary Committee Posts Material On Andrew Traver

February 21, 2011 by

The Senate Judiciary Committee has posted the material they have received in support of Andrew Traver’s nomination to be the Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives. The materials include answers to the Committee Questionnaire, press releases involving Traver, speeches and appearances made by Traver, and finally interviews with the press by Traver while he has been serving as SAC of the Chicago Field Division.

Included are the official letters of support on the nomination from the following law enforcement groups:

* February 8, 2011 – Major Cities Chiefs Association
* January 24, 2011 – Major County Sheriffs’ Association
* January 18, 2011 – National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives
* January 12, 2011 – National Sheriffs’ Association
* December 9, 2010 – National Narcotic Officers’ Associations’ Coalition
* December 9, 2010 – International Association of Chiefs of Police
* December 7, 2010 – Women in Federal Law Enforcement

Most of the law enforcement groups have a record of being anti-gun rights. For example, National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives (NOBLE) passed a resolution in support of the Brady Campaign. The IACP, Major Cities Chiefs Association, and the National Sheriffs Association all are on record as opposing the Tiarht Amendment.

There are no major surprises in the material submitted. One does get a sense of Traver’s willingness to demonize certain firearms as seen in this from a 2006 press conference announcing prosecutions of gang members:

THESE FIREARMS ARE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE FIREARMS SEIZED DURING THIS INVESTIGATION. THE AK-47 TYPE ASSAULT RIFLES ARE DEVASTATING, HIGH-CAPACITY WEAPONS THAT FIRE A ROUND EASILY CAPABLE OF PENETRATING POLICE BODY ARMOR. WE CONDUCTED A TEST WHERE WE PLACED A BALLISTIC VEST IDENTICAL TO THOSE WORN BY ATF AGENTS ON THE STREET ON A TARGET ST AND AND SHOT IT WITH A .40 CALIBER HANDGUN. THE VEST EASILY STOPPED THE BULLET. THEN WE SHOT THE VEST WITH AN AK-47 – THE BULLET COMPLETELY PENETRATED THE VEST AND EXITED THROUGH THE BACK LEAVING A GAPING EXIT WOUND THE SIZE OF TWO CLENCHED FISTS.

The same could have been said about a Winchester Model 94 lever action carbine in .30-30. The average bulletproof vests worn by law enforcement are rarely capable of stopping any centerfire rifle bullet.

I did get one question answered. I had wondered in the past why Traver’s Navy career appeared to be so short. According to the answers he submitted to the Committee’s Questionnaire, Traver received a hardship discharge/resignation and left the Navy as an Ensign (O-1) in May 1987. He had only been assigned to his first duty assignment, USS Benjamin Stoddart, for approximately 9 months. The next month he started working in law enforcement for the Crystal Lake, IL Police Department and for ATF a few months later. I don’t know enough about Navy Bureau of Personnel (BUPERS) operations to know whether his hardship discharge was unusual or not. (If anyone does know about BUPERS hardship discharges for officers, I’d be interested.)

There is no hearing date set for Traver. There is some speculation that the delay is due to Project Gunwalker and the fear of the questions that Sen. Charles Grassley would ask of Traver. As David Codrea notes in his Gun Rights Examiner column:

The only question seems to be is the decision to hold off on what the anti-gun choice lobby deems a “crucial position” was initiated by Chairman Leahy, by the nominee himself, or by his Justice Department handlers.

The answer to David’s question would be interesting.