Nickels

Frankly, this isn’t new financial advice. James Wesley, Rawles, author of Patriots who blogs at SurvivalBlog.com, has been urging people to accumulate nickels for years. There are two reasons behind it. First, the raw metals that make up a nickel – copper and nickel – are worth 7.3 cents as of the close of business on February 18th. So for 5 cents you get something worth more if it is melted down. If commodity prices decline to zero, the coin will still return 5 cents. In other words, it is an investment that only has an upside.

Second, Gresham’s Law says good money drives out bad. In other words, money who’s nominal value and commodity value are close will be worth more than those where the commodity value is virtually nil when compared to the nominal value. To put this in perspective, a dime whose nominal value is 10 cents has a commodity value of 2.6 cents. An even greater disparity is found in the golden Presidential Dollar coins. Their face value is $1 but their melt value is only 7.7 cents.

Update On Castle Doctrine Hearings In North Carolina

Grass Roots North Carolina released this alert today on the Castle Doctrine bill hearing in the State Senate:

Senate Bill 34: “Castle Doctrine” received its first hearing in the NC Senate Judiciary II Committee yesterday, and thanks to your input and the efforts of two pro-gun Senators, it is likely to be passed out of the committee far stronger than it its original version.

In the days leading up to the meeting, members of the GRNC Legislative Team worked the committee, handing out comparisons between current NC law, the three Castle Doctrine bills thus far introduced, and other states which have adopted similar laws. Chaired by longtime GRNC supporter Sen. Austin Allran (R-Catawba, GRNC ****), the first meeting was intended to give all parties their say on the bill.

Although SB 34 is presently a weak bill based on a compromise made in the previous legislative session, Judiciary II co-chair Buck Newton (R-Nash/Wilson, ****) and SB 34 sponsor Andrew Brock (R-Davie/Rowan) are preparing amendment language to address weaknesses in the bill, potentially bringing it to a version similar to GRNC’s preferred version, HB 74.

The Rich And Famous

Fitzgerald: The rich are different than you and me.

Hemingway: Yes, they have more money.

While this is actually a misquotation of a conversation between F. Scott Fitzgerald and Ernest Hemingway, when applied to New York City’s pistol permits system, the rich (and famous) are different than you and me. They can get their pistol permit applications approved.

In an article published today entitled The Rich, the Famous, the Armed, the New York Times examined New York City public records to see who had a pistol permit. In a city of 8.3 million residents, only 37,000 people have pistol permits.

Among the more than 37,000 people licensed to have a handgun in the city are dozens of boldface names and public figures: prominent business leaders, elected officials, celebrities, journalists, judges and lawyers.

Some expressed pride in their gun ownership, like the renowned divorce lawyer Raoul Felder, who readily posed with his .38-caliber Smith & Wesson. Others, including David Breitbart, Yetta Kurland and Walter Mack, all well-known lawyers, were irked to learn they would be included in an article based on the public records. And there were a few conflicted souls, like Alexis Stewart, co-host of “Whatever With Alexis and Jennifer” on SiriusXM radio and the Hallmark Channel.

“I don’t believe people should be allowed to have guns in America,” Ms. Stewart, daughter of Martha, said in an interview, explaining that she bought a .357 Magnum after 9/11 — but would be happy to give it up if handguns were banned. “Having a swimming pool is way more dangerous than having a gun,” she added.

While I would agree with Alexis Stewart that a swimming pool is more dangerous than a firearm in the house, her hypocrisy irks me. Because she is part of NYC’s privileged class, she can get a pistol permit and did. However, she doesn’t believe that people (other than her) should have guns in America. She, of course, would “give it up if handguns were banned”. Of course she would – because she’d would then just hire a bodyguard to protect her from the riff-raff.

Debit-Card Fraud

This is a good video about banks and your protection against debit-card fraud. Given that only 44% of banks will make you whole on your losses, it is a good idea to check with your bank to see if they are part of that 44%.

Since I have been the target of identity theft in the past, one tip I would suggest is to make use of your bank’s email notification services. For example, I get an email every morning from my bank telling me what my balance is from the previous day. When I was responsible for my late mother’s accounts, I had it set up so that I got a low balance notification and a notification for any transaction over a certain dollar amount. This last one would be very useful in providing alerts of unauthorized transactions.

House Says No To Money For Multi-Rifle Reporting

Yesterday evening, the House of Representatives voted in favor of an amendment offered by Rep. Dan Boren (D-OK) to HR. 1, Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011 . The amendment read:

An amendment numbered 566 printed in the Congressional Record to prohibit the use of funds to be used to require a person licensed under section 923 of title 18, United States Code, to report information to the Department of Justice regarding the sale of multiple rifles or shotguns to the same person.

A person licensed under 18 USC 923 is a FFL. The vote to adopt the above amendment originally passed on a voice vote. However, Rep. Denny Rehberg (R-MT) requested a recorded vote so as to put people on record about this issue. I am happy to see that Rep. Heath Shuler (D-NC11) voted for the amendment as did the other NRA endorsed Democrats from North Carolina – Mike McIntyre and Larry Kissell.

As discussed elsewhere, the ATF’s move to require reporting of the multiple sales of semi-auto rifles in a caliber larger than .22 with a detachable magazine has stirred quite a bit of controversy. Using a broad-based demand letter approach is an overt attempt to skirt the provisions and intent of the Gun Control Act of 1968.

Here is the NRA’s release on the subject:

U.S. House Votes to Block Unauthorized Record Keeping on Gun Owners

Friday, February 18, 2011

Fairfax, Va. – The U.S. House has voted for an amendment to H.R. 1 offered by Reps. Denny Rehberg and Dan Boren that prohibits the use of federal funds for a new and unauthorized multiple sales reporting scheme proposed by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE). The measure passed the chamber (277-149) with broad bipartisan support.

“The reluctance of the Calderon and Obama administrations to face reality and pursue real solutions is costing the lives of law enforcement and civilians on both sides of the border,” said Chris W. Cox, executive director for the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action. “NRA has always and will continue to support any law enforcement initiative that targets criminals. Any proposal that only burdens law-aiding gun owners and retailers – as this proposal does – is a non-starter with the NRA. To put it very simply, if someone is breaking the law, go after them full bore. If they aren’t, leave them alone.”

The BATFE is demanding the authority to require all of the 8,500 firearm dealers in California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas to report all sales of two or more semiautomatic rifles within five consecutive business days, if the rifles are larger than .22 caliber and use detachable magazines. Yet, under existing law, the bureau has full access to every record of every firearm transaction by every licensed dealer, whether during a bona fide criminal investigation or simply to enforce compliance with record keeping requirements. This reporting scheme would create a registry of owners of many of today’s most popular rifles – firearms owned by millions of Americans for self-defense, hunting and other lawful purposes.

“On behalf of the tens of millions of law-abiding gun owners in America, I would like to thank Reps. Rehberg and Boren for their leadership on this important issue,” concluded Cox. “Every congressman who voted for this measure seeks real solutions to this tragic and violent problem that continues to escalate. In these trying times, limited resources should not be squandered on programs that will do nothing to address the heinous crimes occurring along our border.”

Investigative Journalism Or Puff Piece?

Sharyl Attkisson, an investigative correspondent for CBS News, posted this yesterday on CleanUpATF.org:

CBS News is working on a report to get at the truth of the assault rifle sales to suspected straw purchasers. We are in need of firsthand information from people who have it. Our deadline is ASAP. We have a lot of information that’s been circulating, but we need to talk to sources directly. You do NOT have to appear on television or be quoted on TV by name (although it would be extremely helpful to have those types of sources too). We can just start with a phone conversation. We are very experienced in dealing with whistleblowers and covert sources.

Please contact soonest and pass along our contact info if you know others who might be willing to talk to us:

Sharyl Attkisson

202-457-4306
sac@cbsnews.com



Picture was included with Attkisson’s post.

Given the so-far fruitless efforts by David Codrea and Mike Vanderboegh to get the mainstream press to report on the story, I am wondering if this is the break they were hoping for. As David has commented many times, the reporters he has spoken with want his list of contacts including the whistle-blowers. As he rightly notes, talking to a reporter gives a whistle-blower no legal protection; talking to a sitting U.S. Senator and his staff under the provisions of Federal law does provide some legal protection to the whistle-blower.

If Attkisson is serious about doing an in-depth story on Project Gunwalker, I wish her luck and success. If it is just a puff piece, well…..

South Carolina Considers Constitutional Carry

Rep. Mike Pitts of Laurens, a former Greenville police officer, has introduced House Bill 3292 which would make South Carolina the newest state to authorize constitutional carry.

In addition to Rep. Pitts, the bill has 37 co-sponsors. The SC House Judiciary Committee held hearings on the bill today. According to an article in The State, the bill has been delayed due to amendments meant to improve the law.

“It’s unfortunate that that there’s so much in this bill that needs to be fixed,” said Robert Butler, a lobbyist for South Carolina GrassRoots GunRights, which asked for more than a dozen amendments.

But state Rep. Thad Viers, a Myrtle Beach Republican, said many amendments would doom the bill to reduce the need to get a concealed weapons permit.

“It gives us time to make corrections – necessary corrections,” said state Rep. Mike Pitts, a Laurens Republican. “I have no problem with us taking the time to make sure we get it right.”

Just like when Arizona was passing constitutional carry, a concealed carry instructor who feels his livelihood is in danger has come out against the change. Ted Landreth of Shooterszone Tactical makes the usual – but erroneous – comparison to getting a driver’s license and the need for training. The difference is that driving is not an enumerated constitutional right. I would wager that those instructors in Arizona who supported constitutional carry have all the business they can handle.

UPDATE: House Bill 3292 was approved unanimously by the SC State House Judiciary General Laws subcommittee on Feb. 24th. It now goes to the full Judiciary Committee. Three more members also requested to added to the list of co-sponsors for the bill.