Uncategorized

Uncategorized

With Verizon Getting The iPhone 4… (Updated with review)

February 17, 2011 by 3 Comments

Verizon and Apple announced on Tuesday that the iPhone4 (or maybe 4.5) will be available to Verizon Wireless customers starting on February 3rd for existing customers and February 10th for new customers. This announcement made a big splash in the media even making all the nightly news shows.

OK, you say, so how does this relate to guns? Money, sure, it is a somewhat big deal as it involves the battle of Apple to stave off the challenges from the Android phones among other things.

It relates to guns because one of our favorite makers of magazines, AR accessories, and training videos – Magpul- is now shipping their own protective case for both the iPhone 3 and iPhone 4 according to a post on the SoldierSystems blog.

Magpul is selling the protective case for only $9.95. It is made from the same semi-rigid thermoplastic as the original Magpul loop. The specs on it according to Magpul are:

Features

* Compatible with all iPhone 4 models (16 and 32GB)
* Compact, slimline design adds minimal bulk to the phone
* Textured surface and PMAG-style ribs on the ends for added grip
* Charging cable port, head phone jack, and ringer/silent switch are accessible with case installed

One other feature – made in America.

You can tell the world you are a Magpul fanboy with your iPhone case and only those in the gun culture will get it. Think of it as the secret handshake that the Brady Campaign in their fevered imagination swears exists among gun owners.

UPDATE:  My Magpul case for the iPhone 4 for Verizon arrived yesterday. One of the concerns was whether with the side buttons being in a slightly different location on the Verizon phone versus the AT&T phone would it work. It does. The molded in button for the on-off switch and for the volume works just fine. The cut-out for the switch to turn off the ringer is off a little but still usable. You just have to use your fingernail to flip it up or down.

I found the case to be solid and it fits well (see comments above). The ribs on the side allow you to grasp the phone easier. As to price, it seems to be about half as much as the silicone ones I was seeing at WalMart.

I am happy I got it and would recommend to anyone with an iPhone 4.

Uncategorized

Memo To ATF – Grassley Not Impressed With Your Dog And Pony Show

February 17, 2011 by 1 Comment

Senator Chuck Grassley is like a dog after a bone when it comes to investigations. It is a point of pride for the Senator. He even puts this on his website when describing himself:

As Iowa’s hired hand in Washington, Grassley immerses himself in the nitty-gritty work of rigorous government oversight. Grassley is a leader when it comes to shedding light on the federal bureaucracy and bringing transparency to the people’s business.

In fact, Grassley’s whistleblower laws have become the federal government’s #1 anti-fraud tool. Thanks to his ongoing legislative victories to protect whistleblowers, taxpayers have gotten back more than $22 billion that would otherwise have been lost to fraud .

So when the ATF sent Asst. Director McDormand and a delegation of ATF heavies to brief Sen. Grassley on Operation Gunrunner, I’m guessing they thought they could blow smoke and he’d buy it. According to an internal report presented at a meeting of Special Agents in Charge, they thought it went well.

ATF briefed Senator Grassley’s office relative to memo written to ATF and recent whistleblower allegations concerning Southwest Border. AD McDermond thought meeting went well and that ATF delegation provided full debriefing of Project Gunrunner and ATF’s Firearms Trafficking strategy overall.

It didn’t. Sen. Grassley sent a new letter to Attorney General Eric Holder describing the meeting saying:

I appreciate the staff briefing that Department of Justice (DOJ) and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) officials provided on February 10, 2011. However, the briefers focused on general issues related to challenges in successfully prosecuting gun trafficking cases. They refused to answer specific questions about the facts and circumstances that led me to request the briefing.

Specifically, they refused to say whether the approximately 103 weapons seized according to the Jaime Avila indictment were the only seizures related to the nearly 770 weapons mentioned in the indictment. They refused to say whether the third assault rifle purchased by Avila in January 2010—the one not found at the scene of CBP Agent Brian Terry’s shooting—has been recovered elsewhere. When asked whether ATF had encouraged any gun dealer to proceed with sales to known or suspected traffickers such as Avila, the briefers said only that they did not have any “personal knowledge” of that.

So now as a result of a dog and pony show gone bad, Sen. Grassley is now asking for very detailed documents. His document request is so specific that it indicates for all the world to see that he has inside information from whistle-blowers and he won’t be put off with a meaningless data dump. Here is what he requested:

Therefore, please provide the following documents to the Committee:

1) All records relating to communications between the ATF and the Federal Firearms Licensee (FFL) who sold the weapons to Avila, including any Report of Investigation (ROI) or other records relating to the December 17, 2009 meeting “to discuss his role as an FFL during this investigation.”

2) All records relating to communications between ATF headquarters and Phoenix Special Agent in Charge (SAC) William Newell from December 1, 2010 to the present, including a memorandum, approximately 30 pages long, from SAC Newell to ATF headquarters following the arrest of Jaime Avila and the death of CBP Agent Brian Terry.

3) A copy of the presentation, approximately 200 pages long, that the Group 7 Supervisor made to officials at ATF Headquarters in the Spring of 2010.

4) Copies of all e-mails related to Operation Fast and Furious, the Jaime Avila case, or the death of CBP Agent Brian Terry sent to or from SAC Newell, Assistant Special Agent in Charge (ASAC) George Gillette, Group 7 Supervisor, or the Case Agent between November 1, 2009 and January 31, 2011.

Grassley set a deadline of February 23rd for receipt of the first batch of documents.

David Codrea sent a Freedom of Information Act request today requesting “any memorandum, report, summary or other communication that describes what happened at the meeting (with Grassley), including a description of any oral briefing and what was said by both sides, and include copies of any such documents filed or stored, or designated for filing and storage, at the Office of Public and Government Affairs.” It will remain to be seen what David gets back and how redacted any documents will be.

As an aside, SAC William Newell has been transferred to the U.S. Embassy in Mexico City as the new ATF Attache. This and the thought that ASAC George Gillette could be promoted to head the Phoenix Division has caused much discussion on CleanUpATF.org.

I think Sen. Grassley’s request for specific documents has just upped the ante exponentially. The question then is when the mainstream media will deem it important enough to cover. We are still waiting for most of them to even acknowledge that a weapon sold in the U.S. could have killed Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry.

UPDATE: The forum at CleanUpATF.org is buzzing with reactions to Grassley’s latest letter. Start with the post by “Zorro” and read up.
Uncategorized

The Case Of The Duck-Hunting High School Student

February 16, 2011 by 1 Comment

From the California Rifle & Pistol Association and attorney Chuck Michel:

SHOCKING VIDEO RELEASED BY CRPA FOUNDATION ABOUT NRA/CRPAF SUCCESSFUL LEGAL EFFORT ON BEHALF OF EXPELLED DUCK HUNTING HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT

Last year the NRA and the CRPA Foundation joined forces under their California Legal Action Project (LAP) to provide legal assistance for high school student Gary Tudesko in his fight to be readmitted to Willows High School in Glenn County, California. NRA News, in cooperation with the CRPA Foundation, has now released a video chronicling the events and the ultimate victory. It is posted at http://youtube.com/MichelLawyers. The Tudesko’s will be guests of honor at the upcoming CRPA banquet to be held on February 26, 2011.

Sixteen-year-old Tudesko was expelled on November 19, 2009 for having unloaded shotguns in his pick-up truck that he legally parked on an off-campus, public street near the Willows High School campus. The high school is located in a small rural community near Sacramento, and the unloaded shotguns were in his truck because he had gone duck hunting in the pre-dawn hours before school. The case garnered significant national media coverage as an example of zero-tolerance policies run amuck.

Tudesko’s shotguns were discovered in the pick up truck by scent-sniffing dogs during a questionable school search. Police ran the license plates, determined Tudesko was the owner, and then called him out of class. Tudesko cooperated and readily told the Principal about the shotguns and his early morning hunting trip.The school first suspended Tudesko for five days, then extended the suspension indefinitely until an expulsion hearing was held. Tudesko’s mother, Susan Parisio defended her son during the November 19th public hearing on his expulsion. She challenged the school district’s legal jurisdiction to enforce the Education Code’s prohibition of guns on campus against her son for having unloaded shotguns locked in an off-campus vehicle parked on a public street. (See Hearing Minutes) High Principal Mort Geivett told the local School Board that, as a matter of law, it had no choice but to expel Tudesko, and the Board did just that.

Tudesko appealed the local school district’s expulsion order to the Glenn County Board of Education. The appeal hearing was held on January 19, 2010. Tudesko was defended by civil rights lawyers Chuck Michel and Hillary Green of the Long Beach-based law firm of Michel & Associates, P.C. (www.michellawyers.com). (Read the Brief in Support of Appeal filed by Michel & Associates, P.C.)

In a dramatic victory, the Glenn County Board of Education unanimously reversed the decision of the Willows Unified School District and Principal Mort Geivett reinstated Gary Tudesko at Willows High School!

This was a great victory for law-abiding gun-owners – particularly young adults who wish to enjoy their rights – over nonsensical “zero-tolerance” policies.

Disturbingly, Geivett claimed the school had jurisdiction over students traveling to and from school, as well as students off-campus during lunch, and that the school had jurisdiction over off-campus vehicles because students could not possess firearms within 1,000 feet of campus. But Geivett confused the Penal Code with the Education Code. With a number of exceptions, it is a potential criminal violation of the Penal Code, specifically the Gun Free School Zone law, to knowingly possess a gun within 1,000 feet of a school. But that law has nothing to do with the sections of the Education Code generally prohibiting possession of firearms on school grounds Tudesko was charged with violating. (See Education Code sections Tuedesko allegedly violated.)

Tudesko’s truck was parked off school grounds, and Gary was not traveling to or from school at the time of the search of the off-campus truck. He was in class. Moreover, schools do not enforce criminal/penal statutes like the Gun Free School Zone law, the District Attorney does. And, the District Attorney and Willows Chief of Police had already stated there would be no charges filed against Tudesko, likely because there was no intent to violate the law.

Legal issues aside, Tudesko was in this position because of a short-sighted bureaucratic approach to enforcing the school’s “zero tolerance” policy toward firearms, which is in many cases misapplied. Time and again these policies have resulted in a triumph of irrational political correctness over common sense and justice. Given that Tudesko had gone duck hunting that same morning with friends (hence the two shotguns), had bird-shot loads as ammunition, had both firearms unloaded, had intentionally parked off-campus to avoid any issues, and had several people who corroborated his story, school administrators should have acknowledged that the circumstances did not warrant expulsion.

Uncategorized

Changes In NRA Lawsuits In Texas

February 16, 2011 by 5 Comments

In the lawsuit the NRA brought against the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, D’Cruz et al v. BATFE et al, James D’Cruz is being replaced as the lead plaintiff. According to the court filing, his parents have moved from Lubbock, TX to Titusville, FL and Mr. D’Cruz has chosen to move with them. He was given permission by the court to withdraw from the case as the lead plaintiff.

Plaintiff’s attorneys were given permission to file a Second Amended Complaint. The amended complaint was filed on February 11th. Rebekah Jennings and Brennan Harmon will be joining Andrew Payne as the individual plaintiffs in the case.

Rebekah Jennings is a resident of Boerne, TX. She has been a member of the U.S. Olympic Development Team for pistol shooting and is a member of the Texas State Rifle Association’s Junior National Team. Ms. Jennings not only shot for the TSRA Junior National Team, she was the high junior at Camp Perry this year in pistol shooting. Her score of 285×15 was not only good enough to win the Junior National Trophy Match but to shatter the old record. Ms. Jennings also made the President’s 100 for pistol shooting. The picture below is of her accepting her trophy at Camp Perry.

Ms. Jennings paired with another Texas junior shooter, Zach Hedrick, to win the Junior National Trophy Team match. You can see the picture of them below accepting that trophy.

The other new plaintiff is Brennan Harmon of San Antonio, TX. While Ms. Harmon currently owns both a rifle and a shotgun, she would like to purchase a pistol for self-defense according to the amended complaint. Of course, she and Ms. Jennings are both precluded from purchasing pistols due to current Federal law and regulations.

In a move that will greatly disappoint Paul Helmke and Josh Horwitz, Facebook pages for both Ms. Jennings and Ms. Harmon feature no pictures except for a profile picture. I am guessing that the NRA attorneys “sanitized” their Facebook pages to prevent having them dragged through the mud like Helmke and Horwitz attempted to do to James D’Cruz. Still I would put nothing past either Helmke or Horwitz in pursuit of their goal of gun prohibition.

James D’Cruz is still listed as the lead plaintiff in D’Cruz et al v. McCraw et al. This case is the challenge to the age 21 requirement to obtain a Texas CHL. I would not be surprised to see this change as well with Mr. D’Cruz’s move to Titusville, FL to live with his parents. If this does change, I will have an update.

H/T Sebastian

UPDATE: Ian asked a queston on whether the State of Texas issues non-resident concealed handgun licenses. They do but require the education component to be taught in Texas. As James D’Cruz has taken the education component while still residing in Texas, I don’t think this will be an issue.

Is Texas the proper venue for a non-resident to sue? I don’t know for sure but would guess it would be.

Below is the Texas requirements for a non-resident license as taken from their CHL Handbook.

GC §411.173. NONRESIDENT LICENSE. (a) The department by
rule shall establish a procedure for a person who meets the eligibility
requirements of this subchapter other than the residency requirement
established by Section 411.172(a)(1) to obtain a license under this
subchapter if the person is a legal resident of a state another state
or if the person relocates to this state with the intent to establish residency
in this state. The procedure must include payment of a fee in an
amount sufficient to recover the average cost to the department of
obtaining a criminal history record check and investigation on a
nonresident applicant. A license issued in accordance with the procedure
established under this subsection:
(1) remains in effect until the license expires under Section
411.183; and
(2) may be renewed under Section 411.185.
(a-1)*[repealed by Act effective September 1, 2005, 79th Leg., R.S., H.B. 225, §4.]
(b) The governor shall negotiate an agreement with any other state
that provides for the issuance of a license to carry a concealed
handgun under which a license issued by the other state is recognized
in this state or shall issue a proclamation that a license issued by the
other state is recognized in this state if the attorney general of the
State of Texas determines that a background check of each applicant
for a license issued by that state is initiated by state or local authorities
or an agent of the state or local authorities before the license is issued.
For purposes of this subsection, “background check” means a search
of the National Crime Information Center database and the Interstate
Identification Index maintained by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
(c) The attorney general of the State of Texas shall annually:
(1) submit a report to the governor, lieutenant governor, and
speaker of the house of representatives listing the states the attorney
general has determined qualify for recognition under Subsection (b);
and
(2) review the statutes of states that the attorney general has
determined do not qualify for recognition under Subsection (b) to
determine the changes to their statutes that are necessary to qualify
for recognition under that subsection.
(d) The attorney general of the State of Texas shall submit the report
required by Subsection (c)(1) not later than January 1 of each calendar
year.

Uncategorized

Brady Campaign On Multi-Rifle Sales Reporting

February 16, 2011 by

Not to be outdone by the thousands of negative comments opposing the ATF’s proposal to require the reporting of multiple sales of certain rifles, the Brady Campaign filed one of the few positive comments in support of the proposal.

Brady Center files comments supporting Obama Administration plan to curb gun trafficking

Feb 15, 2011

Washington, DC – The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence filed comments late today in support of an Obama Administration proposal to require gun dealers in Southwest border states to provide notice of bulk sales of semi-automatic long guns to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). The proposal would assist law enforcement with investigating and curbing the rampant trafficking of AK-47s and other guns from U.S. gun stores to Mexican drug cartels. Current law requires that ATF be notified of multiple sales of handguns only.

The Brady Center’s President, Paul Helmke stated:

“Our weak gun laws have enabled ruthless Mexican drug cartels to arm themselves with vast military arsenals from American gun dealers, who sell traffickers countless AK-47s and AR-15s in bulk. As a result, our gun violence epidemic has become not just a public safety and public health crisis in the U.S., but a national security and foreign policy crisis as well. While our friends in Mexico have fought bravely against these U.S.-armed drug criminals, the Mexican government has asked Washington to bring some sanity to our gun laws, making it harder for dangerous people to get weapons of war. We strongly support the Obama Administration’s proposal to provide law enforcement with notice of bulk sales of semi-automatic long guns. This important anti-gun trafficking tool is a first step of what should be a comprehensive approach to prevent gun violence in Mexico, and in America.”

The letter they sent can be found here. Unlike the comments from the NRA and the NSSF (and thousands of individuals, nowhere in the Brady Campaign’s letter do you see any legal justification for this action. You read anecdotal stories about how this guy or that guy bought X number of evil black rifles or the Commie equivalent. You also get this nonsensical claim:

Assault weapons, as opposed to hunting rifles, are commonly equipped with features that have no sporting value, such as high-capacity ammunition magazines, flash suppressors and pistol grips, which facilitate shooting from the hip.

One statement that I found quite ironic in light of the revelations about Operation Gunrunner was this:

Under current law, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (“ATF”) and other law enforcement, have neither the tools nor the resources to adequately stem the flow of trafficked guns.

ATF has the tools and resources as shown by the documents released by Senator Chuck Grassley. It is just that some in ATF have decided to facilitate guns going to Mexico so that they can be traced back to the U.S. Unfortunately, two of those same rifles are implicated in the murder of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry. I wonder how the Bradys would chose to spin that.

Uncategorized

HR 615 – Collectible Firearms Protection Act

February 15, 2011 by

Rep. Cynthia Lummis (R-WY) has introduced HR 615 – the Collectible Firearms Protection Act. It is a mirror of the bill that Sen. Jon Tester (D-MT) will be introducing into the Senate.

The bill has been referred to the House Foreign Affairs Committee and the House Ways and Means Committee for hearings.

Currently, this bill has eight co-sponsors on both sides of the aisle.

Rep Bishop, Rob [UT-1] – 2/10/2011
Rep Broun, Paul C. [GA-10] – 2/10/2011
Rep Carter, John R. [TX-31] – 2/10/2011
Rep Donnelly, Joe [IN-2] – 2/10/2011
Rep King, Steve [IA-5] – 2/10/2011
Rep Miller, Jeff [FL-1] – 2/10/2011
Rep Rehberg, Denny [MT] – 2/10/2011
Rep Ross, Mike [AR-4] – 2/10/2011

If your own Congressman is gun-friendly, you should ask him (or her) to sign on as a co-sponsor of this bill. As a “cruffler”, if this bill passes it could mean more firearms imported or re-imported to the U.S. for collectors. I still remember the 3-fers that Century International used to offer. I got three Finnish Moisin-Nagant M-39s for $88 plus shipping.

Uncategorized

NSSF Releases Letter Opposing Multi-Rifle Sale Reporting

February 15, 2011 by 2 Comments

From the NSSF:

The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) sent a letter yesterday to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) and the Office of Management and Budget commenting on ATF’s proposal to require as part of a year-long “pilot program” that federally licensed firearms retailers in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California report to ATF the multiple sales of certain rifles (Federal Register, December 17, 2010).

In its letter, NSSF explains that it respectfully disagrees with ATF’s proposal because Congress has not provided ATF the legal authority under the Gun Control Act to impose this reporting requirement and, perhaps more importantly, because NSSF believes that this reporting requirement will actually make it more difficult for firearms retailers to help law enforcement since illegal firearms traffickers will easily modify their illegal schemes to circumvent the new reporting requirement.

While NSSF opposes ATF’s proposal, it remains committed to strongly encouraging all firearms retailers to contact ATF whenever they suspect an illegal straw purchase or other efforts to acquire firearms for illegal purposes.

The NSSF’s letter can be found here.

I found this part of their letter particularly interesting.

The information collection request published by ATF in the Federal Register (75 Fed. Reg. 79021, Dec. 17, 2010) is inconsistent with public statements by ATF (See remarks by Acting ATF Director Ken Melson, December 20, 2010 at http://www.atf.gov/press/releases/2010/12/122010-hdqrts-melson-webcast.html, “ATF Remarks”) and subsequent news reports. First, the information collection request itself applies to all federal firearms licensees everywhere in the United States. It is not geographically limited to licensed firearms dealers located in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California (See ATF Remarks, supra). The notice does not say the collection of information will be for one year, as stated by Acting Director Melson.

The notice also underestimates the burden on licensees. ATF appears assume that only one form per dealer will be filled out per year. Not basis is set forth for this conclusion and we are left to speculate. The time estimate of 12 minutes we believe underestimates the burden on small dealers especially those that have not sold handguns and are not familiar will completing the multiple sales form for handguns. The burden and cost to dealers is also not limited to filling out the form itself. ATF underestimates the burden and cost to dealers – particularly small dealers – to implement processes to ensure compliance wit this new reporting requirement, e.g. that one employee doesn’t accidentally sell and fail to report a perfectly legal rifle to a customer to whom another employee sold a rifle within the five day window.

Buyers will no longer be protected by FOPA. Never before, not even in situations where demand-letters have been permitted, has the required information included the identity of the transferors. Blaustein & Reich, Inc. v. Buckles, 365 F.3d 281 (4th Cir. 2004).