Uncategorized

ISRA On Quinn’s Amendatory Veto

July 3, 2013 by

The Illinois State Rifle Association is taking a dim view of Gov. Pat Quinn’s amendatory veto of HB 183 which provides for that state’s concealed carry. They are asking people who live in Illinois to contact their legislators and ask them to vote to override the amendatory veto. Given that the bill was passed in both houses of the Illinois General Assembly by veto-proof majorities, it is essential that those who voted for the initial bill vote continue to vote to override.

From ISRA Alert:

GOVERNOR QUINN’S SOFT SPOT FOR CRIMINALS RESULTS IN VETO OF CONCEALED CARRY

As many of you know by now, Governor Quinn today issued an amendatory veto of HB0183, otherwise known as Concealed Carry. In issuing his veto, Quinn renders HB0183 essentially worthless from a self-defense perspective.

Under Quinn’s amendments to the bill, most public locations would be “off limits” for concealed carry. Furthermore, firearms would have to be carried in a closed container out of the view of the public. Making concealed carry even more impractical is Quinn’s restriction limiting licensees to one firearm and no more than 10 rounds of ammunition.

Quinn’s amendatory veto contains a whole host of other restrictions that are aimed not only at hindering concealed carry, but also at suppressing the citizen’s right to keep and bear arms in general.

Although Quinn claims his veto is in the interest of public safety, the truth of the matter is that Quinn is using HB0183 as a vehicle to punish firearm owners. Quinn’s motives were made abundantly clear by his decision to surround himself with anti-gun extremists as he announced his veto. Quinn even stood side by side with Fr. Michael Pfleger, the Catholic priest who has openly called for gun shop owners and pro-gun elected officials to be dragged into the streets and murdered.

The bottom line is this: if Quinn’s amendatory veto of HB0183 is not overturned, law-abiding gun owners will have fewer rights than they had before HB0183 was even drafted. Yes, that’s right; HB0183 has been transformed into a gun control bill.

HERE IS WHAT YOU NEED TO DO TO SAVE CONCEALED CARRY AND SAVE YOUR GUNS

1. Immediately phone your State Representative AND your State Senator and politely tell the person who answers the phone that you are a law abiding firearm owner who wishes to see Governor Quinn’s amendatory veto of HB0183 overturned. Phone lines will be busy, but keep trying until you get through. If you do not know who your Senator or Representative is, the Illinois State Board of Elections has an interactive search page here:
www.elections.state.il.us/DistrictLocator/DistrictOfficialSearchByAddress.aspx

If you know who your state legislators are, you can find their contact info here:
www.ilga.gov/house/ and www.ilga.gov/senate/ .

2. Pass this alert on to your friends and family and ask them to call too.

3. Post this Alert to any and all Internet blogs or bulletin boards to which you belong.

4. Take the time to sign up a new ISRA member. ISRA needs the continued support of Illinois gun owners.

If you remain silent, you are giving Quinn tacit approval of his gun control folly.

Uncategorized

More On The Open Carry Fiasco In Mississippi

July 3, 2013 by 2 Comments

The attempt to stop HB 2 – the Mississippi law that defines “concealed” – from coming into effect is looking more and more like a fiasco. By defining concealed, HB 2 clarifies open carry as allowed under the Mississippi Constitution.

A case in point. One of the named plaintiffs, Hinds County District 4 Constable Jon Lewis, says his name was added to the initial complaint without his permission or consent.

From Y’All Politics:

Representative Andy Gipson sent me a text yesterday at 1:00 stating there would would be a press conference about HB2 at 1:30. I decided to attend and show my support for the legislation. After the news conference WAPT’s Erin Kelly asked me about my position on the issue. I told her I supported HB2. She asked if I were a party to the suit and I told her no but other Constables were. She said my name was on it. I discovered to my surprise indeed it was.

I angrily called attorney Lisa Ross’ office and asked for her to call me (she is the Attorney who filed and signed the case). A few minutes later she called and told me she had my name removed and it was a mistake. I told her “Great, but the damage has been done.” along with a few other choice words. I asked her why she did this and she said my name was on a list. I asked her “what attorney takes on a client without his written permission.” She again said it was her mistake and she removed from the case. I consider this lawyering at its worst. I promptly went the Mississippi Bar Association and picked up 3 complaint forms for each attorney involved.

 You would think that a lawyer who had been in practice for 19 years and who had gone to a top 50 law school (University of California Hastings College of Law) wouldn’t be making such amateur mistakes. I guess in her case that ideology has gotten in the way of good legal practice.

Dave Hardy at Of Arms and the Law blog posted about the case yesterday. He considers their temporary restraining order as “bunk” and then proceeds to pick apart their whole initial motion for a TRO. He concludes with this.

Who drafted this pile of offal? Can officers of a county (which is
generally a subdivision of the State) sue the State? Isn’t that a
little like the City Planner suing the city because he doesn’t like the
zoning plan?

If attorney Lisa Ross who drafted both the initial motion and the response to the Mississippi Supreme Court is considered the best legal draftsperson of the legal team involved, then what does that say about District Attorney Robert Shuler Smith and Southern Poverty Law Center attorney Jody Owens?

Nonetheless, a three judge panel of the Mississippi Supreme Court yesterday declined to stay the Temporary Restraining Order issued by Hinds County Circuit Court Judge Winston Kidd. Their order said they were denying the state’s request on procedural grounds and expressed “no opinion respecting the merits of the matter pending before the circuit court.”

Judge Kidd will be holding a hearing on the case on Monday, July 8th. It is still expected that the case will eventually be appealed one way or another to the Mississippi Supreme Court.

Uncategorized

Shocked, I Am (Not)

July 3, 2013 by 1 Comment

As a “reward” for Sen. Joe Manchin’s conversation to the dark side, NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg will be hosting a fundraiser for him. It is to be held at his home in Manhattan. I presume that means his private home and not Gracey Mansion. The minimum to attend is $1,000.

From Buzzfeed:

The fundraiser, scheduled for July 22, marks Bloomberg’s efforts to reward those who supported the gun control campaign and punish those senators who voted against it, including four Democratic senators: Montana’s Max Baucus, Alaska’s Mark Begich, North Dakota’s Heidi Heitkamp, and Arkansas’ Mark Pryor. Last month, the New York City mayor appealed to state donors to cut off contributions to the four lawmakers.

It is no wonder that Beretta scratched the state of West Virginia off the list for possible expansion. I’m sure events like this will play well in the coalfields and factories of West Virginia.

UPDATE: It turns out that Mike Bloomberg not only hates guns but hates coal. Thanks to Sebastian for this link to Bloomberg’s commitment of $50 million to close down coal burning power plants.

Uncategorized

Amendatory Veto Expected In Illinois (Updated)

July 2, 2013 by 4 Comments

Gov. Pat Quinn (D-IL) is expected to issue an amendatory veto of the Illinois carry bill HB 183. Looking at the LiveStream of the event which starts at 11am CDT, it is packed with little kids holding “Moms Demand Action” posters and other anti-gun propaganda.

On the IllinoisCarry.com forum, Todd Vandermyde has posted his expectations of what the amendatory veto will contain. They include:

The Governor is rumored to be making several changes to the bill which would include:


  • · Limiting individuals to carrying a single handgun with a single magazine and no more than 10 rounds of ammo.
  • · Changing the definition to where the handgun must be completely concealed as opposed to concealed or mostly concealed
  • · Banning carry in any place that serves alcohol except private clubs and residence. This would nullify the restaurant carry provisions of the bill.
  • · Inverting the no carry posting to make carry permissible only in places that post it is OK to carry a concealed firearm
  • · Allowing employers to ban firearms on their property and negate the safe harbor provisions.
  • · Remove the ability of individuals to get out of their vehicle and store their handguns in the trunk of their vehicle


Look for the Legislature to move to override the veto when they come back the 8th or 9th.

 Rep. Brandon Phelps (D-Harrisburg) expects the veto to be overridden.

State Rep. Brandon Phelps, a Harrisburg Democrat, said the governor’s office told him Quinn will sign an amended bill Tuesday — seven days before a July 9 deadline to legalize carry of weapons after a federal appeals court found Illinois’ last-in-the-nation ban unconstitutional.

Phelps said he was not told what will be changed but said he likely would try to override any amendments to the hard-won compromise.

 I’ll have more as it is announced.

UPDATE:  As expected, Quinn issued an amendatory veto of  HB 183. He noted that he still objects to the decision of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in Shepard v. Madigan and Moore v. Madigan.

Quinn said that HB 183 has “serious flaws” and that he is proposing some “commonsense” revisions under his power to issue an amendatory veto. They include most of what Todd Vandermyde had said would be coming.

They are in order from my notes:

  1. Ban on carry in bars and restaurants that serve alcohol
  2. The bill’s limits on home rule regarding “assault weapons” (sic) would be removed. corrected
  3. Changes the posting requirement from requiring business owners to post if carry is banned to one in which they would post if allowed.
  4. Employers can ban firearms in employee cars in their parking lots.
  5. A concealed carry permit holder would be restricted to one firearms with one 10-round (maximum) magazine.
  6. Would mandate that the Illinois State Police have more access to mental health records to prevent those who with a “clear and present danger” of having a permit.
  7. Absolute concealment is required.
  8. The Concealed Carry Licensing Review Board would be subject to both the Open Meetings Act and the state’s Freedom of Information Act.
  9. Would require immediate disclosure to law enforcement if you are carrying concealed.

Quinn blamed the “errors” in the bill on the “hurried” process which was the fault of the National Rifle Association.

Quinn’s letter to the legislature announcing his amendatory veto is found here.

He announced a new state funded website called Keep Illinois Safe which will have more information on his veto. The website is now live and it can be found here.

The rest of the news conference consists of gun prohibitionists prattling on about “gun violence” (sic) and I have stopped watching.

UPDATE II: The full text of Quinn’s amendatory veto including the actual changes is now on the General Assembly’s website. It is located here. The bill has now been placed on the House calendar.

UPDATE III: Reaction from the Democrats in the Illinois State Senate on the Illinois Senate Democrats webpage to the amendatory veto is uniformly critical of Quinn. I am actually surprised at this uniformity but note that Cook County senators have not yet been heard from.

Senator Tom Cullerton (D-Villa Park) “I am disappointed—but not surprised—Governor Quinn waited so long to veto concealed carry while he tried to score political points. Even though he has put lawmakers in a difficult position, I am optimistic that we will be able to override his veto and finally get a law on the books.”

Senator Bill Haine (D-Alton) “I would hope that we quickly get this matter before the General Assembly and have an opportunity to override the veto, allowing the State Police to begin the conceal carry process for trained, law-abiding citizens.”

Senator Mike Jacobs (D-Moline) “I recently signed a letter with my colleagues asking Governor Pat Quinn to act on House Bill 183. I am disappointed in the governor’s action to veto the bipartisan concealed-carry measure passed by the General Assembly in May. We need a concealed-carry law that applies to all gun owners equally, regardless of where you live.”

Senator John Sullivan (D-Rushville) “I’m disappointed but not surprised with the governor’s actions today on the concealed carry legislation. He has ignored the will of the people, the courts and the General Assembly. I will work strenuously to see that the veto is overridden so Illinois, even though last to do so, will finally allow concealed carry.”

 UPDATE IV: Rep. Brandon Phelps (D-Harrisburg) has filed a motion in the House to override Gov. Quinn’s amendatory veto.

Uncategorized

About That Open Carry Law Fiasco In Mississippi

July 1, 2013 by 2 Comments

The State of Mississippi passed a law in March clarifying the law regarding open carry in that state. It was to go in effect today. Late Friday afternoon, the District Attorney for Hinds County (Jackson) and an attorney for the Southern Poverty Law Center found a judge who would grant a temporary injunction against the law. As David Codrea noted on Saturday, Judge Winston Kidd bypassed the normal checks and balances.

In an unabashed feat of judicial and linguistic contortion, Kidd ruled that specific language is “vague,” and justified his injunction on the grounds that allowing the bill to take effect would cause “irreparable harm.” That’s consistent with what opponents of the bill, who lost their fight to kill it in the legislature, are promulgating.

Jeff Pittman, a gun rights advocate in Mississippi, had this to say in his 2A Newsletter which I’ve reprinted with Jeff’s permission.

House Bill 2 rationally defines concealed weapons as those not readily visible, and unconcealed weapons as those readily visible. The effect of the law is that open carry will be generally legal without a permit, as the Mississippi constitution provides. The only reason folks haven’t been able to open carry in the past is the erroneous definition of “concealed” in current law and case law, which refers to “concealed in whole or in part.” The constitution says nothing about concealed “in part.”

In what can only be described as a sneak attack, late Friday afternoon just before the courts closed for the last time before the law took effect, a lawsuit was filed seeking an emergency injunction against the law’s taking effect on Monday morning (today).

The lawsuit was brought by Hinds County District Attorney Robert Shuler Smith, Hinds County Sheriff Tyrone Lewis and state Sen. John Horhn (D-Jackson) among others. Those ELECTED officials will be remembered in the future.

The plaintiffs apparently went judge shopping and found a winner in Hinds County Circuit Judge Winston Kidd (another ELECTED official), who agreed the law was ambiguous or vague and a restraining order was “necessary to prevent immediate, irreparable harm.” Kidd issued a temporary injunction in the emergency hearing sometime after 4:30 Friday afternoon.

What the alleged ambiguity or harm is was not clear. What the emergency was to block a law that was passed months ago was also unclear.

Not being an attorney, I was unaware that a county judge could block a state law. What if another county judge blocks the original concealed carry prohibition law?

The temporary restraining order reportedly will last until July 8, when Kidd has scheduled a hearing on the merits of an injunction to block the law.

Look for this to move to a competent court.

Both Horhn and another plaintiff said they don’t believe the constitution provides for open carry. But Article 3, Section 12 of the MS Constitution reads:

“Right to bear arms.
The right of every citizen to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person, or property, or in aid of the civil power when thereto legally summoned, shall not be called in question, but the legislature may regulate or forbid carrying concealed weapons.”

Jody Owens, an attorney for the Southern Poverty Law Center (a well-known liberal hate group), represented DA Smith, and spun a bizarre story for the press, saying “The plaintiffs are trying to stop mayhem. We’re looking at a wild, wild west scenario.”

Arguing for the state, assistant attorney general Harold Pizzetta said that open carry is already protected by the state’s constitution, because it isn’t mentioned in a section that gives the Legislature the right to regulate concealed carry (see above).

Once the new law takes effect, there will still be a lot of problems due to erroneous efforts to circumvent it. Agencies and local governments statewide are falling all over themselves to try to ban legal guns from all government buildings by passing policies and posting signs, apparently little of which is supported by statute. Keep in mind that we also have a preemption law prohibiting such activities by cities and counties. Mississippi Code section 45-9-51 reads “Subject to the provisions of Section 45-9-53, no county or municipality may adopt any ordinance that restricts or requires the possession, transportation, sale, transfer or ownership of firearms or ammunition or their components.”

Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood filed a combined petition to vacate a restraining order and emergency petition for interlocutory appeal with the Supreme Court of Mississippi today. Jeff Pittman notes in a later email that Hood has never been a “particularly strong proponent of gun rights, and this case is likely more of a turf war than a battle of philosophies.” I think Jeff may be quite correct on this last point if this part of the petition is any indication.

From the Gun Rights Examiner:

“[T]he Motion incorrectly declares that District Attorney [Robert Schuler] Smith is bringing this matter in his capacity as ‘the chief legal officer of the State of Mississippi,” the petition documents in an ironic comment about lack of standing that illustrates a presumption of non-existent authority and questionable legal competence on the part of both the DA and the Southern Poverty Law Center attorney backing the power grab.

“A district attorney is prohibited from bringing any suit the subject matter or impact of which would be statewide because only the Attorney General may bring such a suit of statewide importance,” the petition reminds the Court.

The Supreme Court has given Hinds County DA Robert Smith and the rest of the respondents until 5pm this afternoon to file their response.

I would not be surprised to the injunction vacated sometime tomorrow on standing grounds alone. I’ll post more as it becomes available.

UPDATE: Checking the docket of this case on the Mississippi Supreme Court’s website, it appears that the respondents/plaintiffs did submit their response by the end of the business day on Monday. Unfortunately, I’m not able to download their response to read it.

UPDATE II: Thanks to Jeff Pittman (see comments) we have the response by the gun prohibitionists. It can be found here.

Uncategorized

Moves By Illinois Towns On Gun Control

July 1, 2013 by

The Illinois State Rifle Association has released an alert on six town councils or boards that will be considering firearms restrictions in the next couple of days. If you live in one of these towns, I’d urge you to make your presence felt at the board meeting. I’ve included the links to the various agenda and meeting packets.

From ISRA:


UPDATED ALERT – FIVE board meetings with gun regulations on the agenda for Monday, July 1, one for Tuesday July 2

Skokie, Wheeling, Lake Forest, North Chicago to present gun bans

UPDATE: On Monday, July 1, Skokie, Wheeling, Lake Forest, North Chicago and Deerfield appear to be considering new local ordinances at their next council meetings on Monday. It is important that residents be there at these meetings to voice their opposition by addressing the board. If you live in any of these communities, it is essential that you go to that meeting — don’t leave the protection of your civil rights to someone else! If your community is not having a meeting on July 1, please attend one of these listed below. Be sure to arrive early to ensure that you gain entrance to the meeting.

For status of previous meetings, other meeting times, talking points against semi-auto bans, copies of proposed ordinances, links to other resources; please visit http://isra.org/townhall .

High Profile Meeting: Skokie is expected to be the meeting to watch due to strong anti-gun & pro-gun sentiments expressed by its residents. Be sure to wear your IGOLD apparel, ISRA or NRA hats, etc so that you can be recognized by the press. Get there early, please.

Please forward this alert to your mailing list and post it on your favorite forum.

Please be aware of what’s going on in your community. If your town was not listed here, please contact your local city government and inquire about the next council meeting and the latest agenda. If you hear of more local attempts to pass an “Assault Weapon Ban” in another community, please contact the ISRA office at 815-635-3198 or send an email to the ISRA Hotline (hotline@isra.org) and pass along the info. Alert members have helped ISRA to keep you informed

Veterans: Are you a veteran of our armed forces? Your oath and your prior service to our country gives you a unique vantage point to speak from. Please attend a local meeting and provide feedback to the local officials.

What: Skokie Village Board Meeting – Agenda – Packet (p50)
Where: Village Hall 5127 Oakton Street, Skokie 60077
When: Monday, July 1, 8:00 pm

What: Wheeling Village Board Meeting – Agenda+Packet (p38)
Where: 2 Community Boulevard, Wheeling 60090
When: Monday, July 1, 6:30 pm

What: Deerfield Village Board Meeting – Agenda (p157) (p5 comments)
Semi-auto storage ordinance
Where: 850 Waukegan Road Deerfield 60015
When: Monday, July 1, 7:30 pm

What: Lake Forest City Council Meeting – Agenda
Where: 220 E. Deerpath Lake Forest 60045
When: Monday, July 1, 7:30 pm

What: North Chicago City Council Meeting – Agenda
Where: 1850 Lewis Ave, North Chicago 60064
When: Monday, July 1, 7:00 pm

What: Bartlett Village Board Meeting – Agenda (COW)
Gun Ban Discussion – Agenda
Where: 228 S. Main Street, Bartlett, 60103
When: Tuesday, July 2, 7:00 pm

UPDATE: Here are the results of some of the meetings from yesterday.


Skokie — passed AWB

 
North Chicago — passed AWB
 
Lake Forest — tabled with contemplation of placeholder ordinance
 
Wheeling — voted down
 
Orland Park — nothing on agenda

Uncategorized

Oh, Canada

July 1, 2013 by 1 Comment

Today is Canada Day. It marks the uniting of the British colonies of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick with the Province of Canada (which included both Ontario and Quebec) into the Dominion of Canada on July 1, 1867 by way of the British North America Act of 1867. It is Canada’s national holiday.

So on this Canadian holiday I thought it appropriate to look again at the seizure of resident’s firearms in the Province of Alberta.

The RCMP announced on Sunday that they would start returning some of the firearms seized from residents of the town of High River.

An RCMP news release says that owners of guns that were seized should call police, and that an officer will call them back to make arrangements to have the weapons picked up.

The Mounties said earlier that they took the guns as officers searched homes in High River’s flood zone to look for flood victims, pets and anything that might pose a threat to returning residents.

Any guns were removed from homes because they were not properly stored, said Staff Sgt. Brian Jones, who added that no charges are planned.

“There is no indication of that at this point in time. That wasn’t the reason. That wasn’t the intention,” Jones said about the gun seizures.

The Prime Minister’s Office has now gotten involved in this affair. Prime Minister Stephen Harper is a resident of Alberta. His Canadian Parliament riding of Calgary Southwest adjoins the riding in which High River is located.

The move to take the weapons was condemned by the Prime Minister’s Office, who said the Mounties should focus on more important tasks such as protecting lives and private property.

Harper’s criticism of the RCMP’s move brought criticism itself.

Darryl Davies, a Carleton University criminology professor, considered the condemnation from the Prime Minister’s Office to be highly inappropriate.

“It’s completely and utterly inappropriate for the PMO to issue operational instructions to the RCMP,” Davies said Sunday.

Have we arrived at a point in Canada where the PMO can interfere in criminal investigations as well?”

Davies said he thought it must be embarrassing for the RCMP to be admonished by the PMO in the media, and that it undermines the force’s credibility and impartiality.

Davies, who has long criticized the RCMP himself, is also a strong proponent of gun control. He is on record as favoring the banning of all semi-automatic firearms. Davies also served as the Senior Communications Officer on Firearms, Communications Branch Department of Justice. Thus, I think Davies’ criticism in context is more about his anti-gun beliefs than anything to do with political interference with the RCMP.

Unlike the United States where the Constitution is a single document with a number of amendments, the Canadian Constitution is an amalgamation of Acts of Parliament from both Great Britain and Canada. In 1982, Canada passed the Constitution Act, 1982, which contained the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It can be said that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is their equivalent to our Bill of Rights – with exceptions. While it speaks of things like freedom of association and “the right to life, liberty, and the security of the person”, the one thing it does not guarantee is a right to keep and bear arms. Moreover, property rights are not mentioned. Much of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms concerns itself with language rights, the rights of “aboriginal people”, and the education rights of linguistic minorities.

So while we often think of our neighbors to the North as just like us but more polite, legally they have a much different system in which things like property rights and the right to keep and bear arms are treated much differently. That said, Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his Conservative government probably respect both of rights more so than the current Obama administration.

Uncategorized

Two New Shooters

July 1, 2013 by 6 Comments

During our recent trip to the Myrtle Beach area, we took an afternoon excursion to a shooting range in Murrells Inlet. I had planned the trip as part of the “things we did at the beach” this year. I had remembered that there was a range near where we were staying from past trips to the area. Checking with all parts of the family in advance, I got an enthusiastic response from everyone. Thus, in addition to the pool toys and beach hut, we brought with us an assortment of pistols ranging from my Sig P238 to my Daewoo DH-40 with three various 9mm pistols in between. I also dug into my ammo stash so we wouldn’t have to buy ammo at the range.

Coastal Sports and Range in Murrells Inlet is a very nice gun store with an excellent, well-lit, 5-bay indoor range. When we got there, store manager Woodie Pitts greeted us warmly, discussed the range rules, inspected all my pistols and ammo, and helped us pick out targets. We also rented a Beretta Neo and a Ruger 22/45 for the new and newer shooters to use. The rangemaster Michael Wiestling went over the operations of both pistols with everyone before we entered the range.

After donning our hearing protection and safety glasses, we went into the range area. It was separated into the five shooting bays and a glassed-in room where the non-shooters could watch. While there were nine of us in the party, only seven had originally
planned to shoot. The Complementary Spouse’s older daughter Wendy said
she didn’t feel comfortable shooting but did want to watch. That would change.

Michael was a great help in not only explaining how the range controls worked but in working with the less experienced shooters. While I was getting the ammo and guns set out in two of the bays, he was providing the less experienced shooters instructions on grip, trigger control, and sight picture. Our party had three experienced shooters and four relatively new shooters.

While my niece and nephew had shot handguns before, my sister-in-law Cindy had not and wanted to experience it. She strongly believes everyone should have some exposure to gun safety and at least know enough about guns to safely unload one. As you can see below, she went beyond that. Before the range time was over, she had shot both .22’s, her sister’s M&P, and my Sig P238.

Cindy with Beretta Neo

 My niece Grace who had shot before likewise got to shoot both .22s and one of the 9mm pistols we brought as did her brother Grant.

Grace with Beretta Neo

While all the afternoon was good, in my opinion the best moment came when Wendy turned to the Complementary Spouse and said, “I think I’d like to try it.” And try it she did.

Wendy with Beretta Neo

With help from the rangemaster Michael and her Uncle Larry, Wendy not only shot the .22 pistols but tried her hand at shooting the 9mm pistols. Like the former athlete she was, Wendy took instruction well and did great.

Wendy shooting Ruger SR9 with Larry coaching

Like I said earlier, we arrived with seven shooters and left with eight including two first-time shooters. I think the smile on Laura’s face below captures just how much fun we all had.

If you are taking a trip to the Myrtle Beach area and want to take in some shooting, I can highly recommend Coastal Sports and Range. They were great and have a really nice gun store to boot.

Uncategorized

New Maps Of The Battle Of Gettysburg

June 30, 2013 by 1 Comment

Tomorrow marks the 150th anniversary of the start of the battle of Gettysburg. The battle here marked the turning point in the War Between the States (or American Civil War). Confederate forces under General Lee never again ventured into Northern territory after this battle.

On the second day of the battle, General Lee ordered an attack on the left wing of the Union line. Erroneous scouting reports said that there were no Union forces on either Big or Little Round Top. Lee, in essence, started the attack with erroneous information and with what he himself could see of the Union Army.

A team led by geographer Anne Knowles of Middlebury College has created new interactive maps of the battle and the battle terrain for the Smithsonian Institute to commemorate this anniversary.

Knowles had this to say in an interview about the project:

“Our goal is to help people understand how and why commanders made their decisions at key moments of the battle, and a key element that’s been excluded, or just not considered in historical studies before, is sight,” Knowles said.

Long before the advent of reconnaissance aircraft and spy satellites, a general’s own sense of sight — his ability to read the terrain and assess the enemy’s position and numbers — was one of his most important tools. Especially at Gettysburg, where Lee was hampered by faulty intelligence.

“We know that Lee had really poor information going into the battle and must have relied to some extent on what he could actually see,” Knowles said.

The geographer applied GIS to find out what Lee could see and what he couldn’t.

To reconstruct the battlefield as it existed in 1863, researchers used historical maps, texts and photos to note the location of wooden fences, stone walls, orchards, forests, fields, barns and houses, as well as the movement of army units. High-resolution aerial photos of the landscape yielded an accurate elevation model. All of it was fed into a computer program that can map data.

Lee is believed to have surveyed the battlefield from a pair of cupolas, one at a Lutheran seminary and the other at Gettysburg College, both of which yielded generally excellent views.

But a GIS-generated map, with illuminated areas showing what Lee could see and shaded areas denoting what was hidden from his view, indicates the terrain concealed large numbers of Union soldiers.

 A screen cap of this map showing what Lee could and couldn’t see is below. The gray areas indicate what was hidden from Lee’s sight by the topography of the battlefield as he looked down from Seminary Ridge.

I think the Smithsonian has done a great service with these interactive maps as they lead to a greater appreciation of the decision making by both Confederate and Union generals at this battle. The interactive map can be reached here.