Month: September 2010

Uncategorized

Gun Rights Policy Conference

September 20, 2010 by

The Second Amendment Foundation’s Gun Rights Policy Conference starts this coming Friday evening in San Francisco. You can register for the event here if you are going to be in area.

I’d love to meet up with any bloggers who are going to be there. We are flying in from North Carolina on Friday afternoon and will be there for the entire conference. If you are going to be there, leave a message here or pop me an email at jpr9954@gmail.com.

I think this is going to be a great event. I know Otis McDonald and Alan Gura will be there along with a number of others from the gun rights community.

UPDATE:  The agenda and speakers have been set for the Gun Rights Policy Conference. Follow this link to see the whole list.

Uncategorized

The Four Rules of Gun Safety

September 19, 2010 by 1 Comment

Il Ling New of the Gunsite Academy presents the four rules of gun safety in this video produced by Ruger. It is fitting that someone from Gunsite present these rules as they were developed by the late Col. Jeff Cooper who founded Gunsite.

What I particularly like about this presentation of the rules is that Il Ling gives the rationale behind the rules.

Uncategorized

So Proud

September 19, 2010 by 1 Comment

A few weeks ago the Complementary Spouse came home from work and announced that a friend’s church was sponsoring a North Carolina Concealed Handgun Permit class for women. The work friend was going to take the class and wondered if the Complementary Spouse was interested in the class because the friend knew that I did a gun blog.

She asked what I thought and I said it was up to her. I did say it would be a good way to get a proper introduction to handgun shooting and safety. I also thought it would be much better if I wasn’t the one doing it. I had heard too many horror stories of boyfriends teaching girlfriends to shoot and really botching it.

The Complementary Spouse decided she wanted to do it mostly because it was her constitutional right as an American and because she thought it would be smart to know more about my guns in case of an emergency. Moreover, since the class was going to held on her birthday, it would make it very memorable.

We spent a good deal of Friday night going over some of the information that is presented in the North Carolina course. She found a few websites that detailed the information and she studied them closely. I showed her the differences between a revolver and a semi-automatic pistol. We went over how each were loaded, reviewed safety rules, and how to properly grip a pistol. We also found out she was cross dominant – left eyed, right handed. She really didn’t want to go into the class unprepared and she didn’t.

Saturday morning came early as she was meeting her friend at 7:15 for breakfast. I sent her off with a cup of coffee and a kiss.

 

When she got home at around 6pm, she was just bubbling. She had a great time, learned a lot, and shot straight. In her shooting test, she had 29 center of mass with only one flyer which hit in the belly button region. She plans to go ahead and apply for her Concealed Handgun Permit. She isn’t sure if she will carry but she believes it is important to go on record so as to secure her rights to do it. I am really, really proud of her.

She said she wants to continue shooting as she had a great time. Isn’t that the way it should be? As Tom Gresham always says on GunTalk, take someone shooting this week. When a new person is introduced to shooting, they quickly realize that what the media and the Bradys say about gun owners is an outright lie.

PS: I always refer to the wonderful woman in my life on the blog as the Complementary Spouse. She wants to preserve her anonymity and I respect that. The term Complementary Spouse is a joke with us. Years ago when I was renewing my membership at Sam’s Club I was asked if I wanted a Complementary Spouse card.

Uncategorized

Post-McDonald Cases – Calendar of Events

September 18, 2010 by 5 Comments

The latter part of this month into October will be quite busy in terms of hearings and responses in the post-McDonald gun rights cases. Many of the complaints will have their first official response from the defendants so interesting things will be happening. To provide a bit of perspective on this, I’ve made up a “calendar of events”.

September 17th  – Response received from State of California in Owner-Operators Independent Drivers Association et al v. Lindley. Case challenges California AB962 which requires face-to-face sales of handgun ammunition. More on the case here.

September 20th – State Ammunition et al v. Lindley – Response due from the State of California to original complaint. Case challenges California AB962 which requires face-to-face sales of handgun ammunition. More on the case here.

September 20th – Woollard v. Sheridan et al – Response due from the State of Maryland to original complaint. Case challenges Maryland’s requirement to show “apprehended danger” in order to qualify for concealed carry permit. More on the case here.

September 23rd – Second Amendment Arms et al v. City of Chicago et al – Status hearing. Case challenges the City of Chicago’s New Gun Law. Seeks restitution for confiscated firearms and class action status. More on the case here.

September 23rd – Ezell et al v. City of Chicago et al – Status hearing. Case challenges the City of Chicago’s ban on gun ranges. More on the case here and here.

September 24th – Bateman et al v. Perdue et al – Response due from plaintiffs to defendant’s motions to dismiss. Case was first post-McDonald suit brought. It challenges North Carolina’s emergency powers ban on possession of firearms outside a person’s residence during a declared state of emergency. More on the case here and here.

October 8th – Mishaga v. Monken – Response due from State of Illinois to original complaint. Case challenges requirements of Illinois’ FOID card. More on the case here.

October 12th – Benson et al v. City of Chicago et al – Extension granted to defendant’s to answer or plead case for Local Rule 40.4 case reassignment motion. Case challenges the City of Chicago’s New Gun Law. More on the case here, here,

October 22nd – Kachalsky et al v. Cacace et al –  Motions due from all parties. Case challenges New York’s requirement to show “good cause” in order to receive a handgun carry permit. More on the case here, here, and here.

Uncategorized

The Nevada Example

September 18, 2010 by 2 Comments

All parties in the case challenging the possession and discharge of firearms for self-defense in Nevada State Parks, Baker v. Drozdoff et al (former Baker v. Biaggi et al), have agreed to a preliminary injunction in the case. This injunction prevents the enforcement of Nevada Administrative Code Sec. 407.105(1)(b) – (c) which prohibits the possession of a loaded firearm unless one had a recognized concealed carry permit as well as the discharge of any weapon. Nevada has 60 days in which to start an administrative rule-making procedure to amend this code to remove language that abridges the right to keep and bear arms.

Sec. 407.105 currently states, in part:

Possession or use of weapons. (NRS 407.0475, 407.065)

1. In any park, a person shall not:
(a) Use a bow and arrow, slingshot or paint ball launcher;
(b) Possess a firearm, unless:
(1) The firearm is unloaded and inside a vehicle; or
(2) The person in possession of the firearm has a permit to carry a concealed firearm issued pursuant to the provisions of NRS 202.3653 to 202.369, inclusive, and is carrying the firearm in conformity with the terms of the permit;
(c) Discharge a weapon, including, without limitation, an air rifle, spring gun or air pistol; or
(d) Throw a knife, hatchet, spear, stone or projectile,
except as authorized by the Administrator.

 As I described in this post, the case was brought by the Mountain States Legal Foundation on behalf of Al Baker, an University of Idaho law student, who had sought a special use camping permit for a group campsite near Elko, NV. In his permit application, he specifically stated that he intended to have a firearm in his tent for protection whereupon he was informed that would violate the law. Baker is a NRA-certified firearms instructor and holds concealed carry permits for the states of Idaho, Oregon, and Utah. However, Nevada does not have reciprocity with any of these states. While Nevada concealed carry permit holders are allowed to carry in Nevada State Parks, no one is allowed to discharge a firearm even in self-defense (outside of specified hunting areas and target ranges).

Congratulations are due to attorney Jim Manley of the Mountain States Legal Foundation and to the Nevada Attorney General’s Office for being able to forge an agreement that works to preserve the Second Amendment rights of visitors to the Nevada State Parks. I guess it is too much to hope for to think that we might see similar moves in places like Chicago, New York, or California.

UPDATE: I received an email from Jim Manley this afternoon (Sept 21). The court order granting a preliminary injunction and stay on proceedings has been signed and filed. I have uploaded it here.

Uncategorized

Not That Kind of AK

September 18, 2010 by 2 Comments

If you stumble across a website called the “AK Press”, let me warn you in advance – it isn’t about AK-47’s or other Kalashnikov variants. It isn’t some helpful site discussing the differences between an AK-47 and an AK-74 or suggesting which mixture of wood stains to use to get the perfect plum color on your stocks. It isn’t a forum like AK-47 Net or the AK Files or the AK Forum.

Now that I’ve said what it isn’t, I’ll let them tell you what they are:

AK Press is a worker-run collective that publishes and distributes radical books, visual and audio media, and other mind-altering material. We’re small: a dozen people who work long hours for short money, because we believe in what we do. We’re anarchists, which is reflected both in the books we provide and in the way we organize our business. Decisions at AK Press are made collectively, from what we publish, to what we distribute and how we structure our labor. All the work, from sweeping floors to answering phones, is shared. When the telemarketers call and ask, “who’s in charge?” the answer is: everyone. Our goal isn’t profit (although we do have to pay the rent). Our goal is supplying radical words and images to as many people as possible.

Ah, jeez, where do these people come from? Unfortunately, having seen what passes for scholarship in some of the nation’s colleges and universities, I think I know the answer to this.

Uncategorized

Thrust and Parry – Gura and the Chicago Attorneys in the Ezell case (updated)

September 16, 2010 by 2 Comments

Watching Alan Gura and the attorneys for the City of Chicago go at it in the Ezell case is like watching a fencing competition. It is attack and counter-attack, thrust and parry, lunge and counter-lunge. No foils or epees for these lawyers. Instead it is sabers and no protective headgear all the way.

Right about now (Sept 16th at 5pm EDT) Alan Gura and David Sigale are going into court in Chicago for a hearing on their motion for a temporary restraining order against the City of Chicago. They are seeking this TRO so that the Action Target, the Second Amendment Foundation, and the Illinois State Rifle Association can open a portable firing range in Chicago. The firing range is built on a trailer which has bullet traps, bullet-proof walls, sound dampening, and room for three shooting lanes. These types of ranges are often used in law enforcement training and for weapons demonstrations. They want to open up this range so that people can meet the live-fire requirements of the Chicago Firearms Permit (CFP).

Unlike the NRA’s case, Benson et al v. Chicago et al, this case has featured frontal legal assaults by the City of Chicago’s Legal Department from almost Day One. These assaults have been met with fierce counter-attacks by Gura and Sigale along with some surprises of their own. To use an analogy, Benson is like the war on the Western Front during WWII while Ezell is like the war on the Eastern Front. The latter was vicious and brutal with no quarter asked nor given.

And so it is with these cases. I don’t know if it is because the City of Chicago is still fuming mad that they lost the McDonald case or because they respect the legal acumen of Alan Gura and don’t want to be caught short again. Nonetheless, the war started four days after the original filing in this case.

On August 20th, the City of Chicago filed a Local Rule 40.4 Motion to have Ezell reassigned to Judge Ronald Guzman on the ground of relatedness. The amended complaint in Benson gave Chicago the needed entry point as it also challenged the ban on gun ranges in Chicago. Numerous websites that rank judges have put Judge Guzman near or at the bottom of all the judges in the North District of Illinois.

In response to this move, the plaintiffs filed for a temporary restraining order on August 22nd. This ended up being denied without prejudice which meant that it could be brought again later. At that same time, Judge Virginia Kendall set the schedule for discovery, responses, and counter-responses. Discovery was due to end on September 13th, responses due by September 20th, replies to these due a week later, and hearings set for October 1st. Chicago made an oral motion for a slower schedule and were denied.

Now it starts to get really messy. The City of Chicago started taking their depositions of the plaintiffs and related third parties. In the process of taking these depositions, they forgot to give notice to the plaintiff’s attorneys which was required. Alan Gura filed a motion for an emergency motion on September 10th to quash these unserved subpoenas. He also asked for sanctions against the City of Chicago for their actions. Chicago claimed it was a clerical oversight and the court let them off the hook.

This Monday, September 13th, Alan Gura and David Sigale again filed a motion for a temporary restraining order against Chicago so that the range could be opened. The range would open on September 24th if allowed.

Chicago retaliated with a motion to “vacate briefing schedule and preliminary injunction hearing” which was set for October 1st. They are really pushing hard to have this case sent to Judge Guzman and out of Judge Kendall’s court.

Alan Gura responded with an especially harsh attack on the City of Chicago calling this motion frivolous and only meant to delay the proceedings. He also accused Chicago of being abusive during discovery. Gura went on to say that none of their arguments were correct.

I plan to do a more in-depth analysis of the case this weekend. I have appended the docket report for this case to illustrate all the attack and counter-attacks.

Ezell – Docket Report as of Sept 16

UPDATE: Damn! The Temporary Restraining Order was denied. However, so was the motion by the City of Chicago that sought to delay long enough for Judge Guzman to rule on the Local Rule 40.4 motion. There is a status hearing set for Thursday, Sept 23rd.

On a side note, I checked out the American Bar Association ratings from when Judges Guzman and Kendall were nominated. The ratings are well qualified, qualified, and not qualified. Guzman was rated Qsm/NQmin. This meant that a strong majority thought he was qualified but a minority thought he was not qualified. Kendall, by contrast, was rated WQsm/Qmin which meant that everyone thought she was qualified and a strong majority thought she was well qualified.

Uncategorized

9 Classic Firearms Myths

September 16, 2010 by

Rsktkr at the ITSTactical blog has an excellent article debunking nine classic firearms myths and whoppers.

The 9 Classic Myths

  1. Caliber Matters
  2. Firearms Experts
  3. Dryfiring Damages Weapons
  4. “I’m a Great Shot”
  5. “A (insert gun here) isn’t very accurate”
  6. “I know how to shoot I’m a Police officer, Marine…(Fill in the Blank)” 
  7. “Kneeling/Modern Isosceles/Monica/(insert technique here) isn’t comfortable”
  8. “I can’t shoot a (insert gun here) because of the grip angle”
  9. “Guns need to be cleaned every time they are fired”

Read his responses to these myths here. Some of them are quite funny and really quite true.

Uncategorized

Don’t Go Looking for a Fight

September 15, 2010 by

Dave Spaulding is a retired law enforcement officer and firearms trainer. Recently, he has been doing a series of videos for Ruger which can be seen on YouTube. He has also been collaborating with Rob Robideau in a series of podcasts on combative training on the Personal Armament Podcast.

In one of his first combative’s podcasts entitled Combative Willingness, Dave addresses the issue of the self-defense with a firearm versus the combative application of the firearm. He holds that if you are always on the defensive, you are destined to lose. He says this because at its root meaning, defense means to lose slowly. Whereas combative means to be ready and willing to fight. After the initial attack, you have transitioned from a defensive posture both mentally and physically into one where you are taking the fight to the attacker.

To be combative does not mean you are looking for a fight. Far from it. In the Combative Willingness episode, Dave begins to cover this at around the 8:30 mark. As he notes, no matter how well trained you are or how well prepared you are, you will always run the risk of losing. Dave doesn’t sugarcoat it – losing in a fight, especially a fight involving any sort of weapon, can mean losing your life.

John Farnam of Defense Training International has a column he calls “Quips, Quotes, and Lessons Learned From the Field”. His September 5th column contained comments from Dave on this very issue:

“I remain amazed at the number of students who seem enamored (albeit discreetly) with the thought of becoming involved in some type of deadly combat. Most are pitiably naive and have scant concept of what a real fight entails, and that, no matter the odds, they’ll still have a good chance of losing!

Even the best training falls short with regard to one critical aspect: there is never genuine expectation of injury, nor death!

Few of us receive anywhere near the training of our Special Operations Forces, yet they are killed regularly by less-trained, less-motivated, less-hale conscripts, with ageing, poorly-maintained AKs, who haphazardly stick them over walls and yank on the trigger. You can kill most of them, but there is ever the issue of the ‘lucky shot!’

Physical fighting should only be undertaken when you have no choice. When threats can be avoided, they should be. When disengagement can be accomplished at low risk, it should be.

However, when forced to take a stand, a stand worth fighting, and dying, for, then we should counter with great skill, surprise, speed, potency, advantage, and enthusiasm! When you must strike, put him to sleep!”

I highly recommend the whole series of podcasts on combatives on the Personal Armament Podcast. You can download them for the site or on iTunes. If you carry concealed or you have a firearm at home with which to protect your family, you owe to yourself and your loved ones to listen to these podcasts. Training to protect yourself or those you love is as much mental training as it is time at the range.

On a related note, Dave Spaulding’s book Handgun Combatives, 2nd. Ed., is reviewed by Rich Grassi in today’s The Tactical Wire. He calls it one of the few books he always wants close by for immediate reference.