- 3 Boxes of BS
- 357 Magnum
- A Day In The Life Of An Ambulance Driver
- A trainwreck in Maxwell
- Ace of Spades HQ
- All Nine Yards
- Another Gun Blog
- Arizona Rifleman
- Armed and Dangerous
- Armed and Safe
- Arms are the Mark of a Free Man
- Atomic Nerds
- Ballseye’s Boomers
- Bearing Arms
- Bob Owens
- Bright Lights and Saturday Nights
- Crime In Charlotte
- DaddyBear’s Den
- Days of our Trailers
- Dr. Helen
- Everyday No Days Off
- Evyl Robot Soapbox
- Fill Yer Hands
- Firearm Blog
- From the Barrel of a Gun
- Gun Blog Variety Cast
- Gun Free Zone
- Guns, Cars, and Tech
- Hell in a Handbasket
- Hot Air
- In From the Cold
- In Jennifer’s Head
- Irons in the Fire
- Knitebane Manor
- Last Refuge of a Scoundrel
- LawDog Files
- Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion
- Lurking Rhythmically
- Massad Ayoob
- Monster Hunter Nation
- My Tumultuous Adventure
- New Jovian Thunderbolt
- Newbie Shooter
- No Lawyers
- Of Arms and the Law
- Plumbum et Circenses
- Progressives Today
- Raymond’s Leather Saps
- Reality-Based Litigation
- Rise of the Anti-Media
- Roberta X
- Roberts Gun Shop
- Shall Not Be Questioned
- Sharp as a Marble
- Sipsey Street Irregulars
- Smallest Minority
- Straight Forward in a Crooked World
- Support Your Local Gunfighter
- The Anonymous Conservative
- The Armed Lutheran
- The Backwoods Engineer
- The Captain’s Journal
- The Freeholder
- The Gateway Pundit
- The Miller
- The Minuteman
- the munchkin wrangler.
- The Packetman
- The Sacred Cow Slaughterhouse
- The Squirrel Report
- The View From North Central Idaho
- The War on Guns
- Tractor Tracks
- Triangle Tactical
- View From The Porch
- VolkStudio Blog
- Vuurwapen Blog
- walls of the city
- Weer’d World
Monthly Archives: October 2010
The new face of gun control
Handgun Control Incorporated The Brady Campaign’s newest mascot was on Oprah recently flogging the anti-gun message. When you hear him speak, remember that Colin was disarmed and helpless by Virginia State policy. He was under 21, so a concealed carry license was unavailable to him, and even if he had been old enough, Virginia Tech policy would have subjected him to expulsion had he exercised his right to carry. Colin tries to say that the situation was too chaotic for him or anyone else to have used a gun to stop the rampage. Really?
XXX(*)then moved on to Norris 211 and 204. In both of these classrooms, XXX was initially prevented from entering the classroom by barricades erected by instructors and students. In room 204, Professor Liviu Librescu, a Holocaust survivor, forcibly prevented XXX from entering the room. Librescu was able to hold the door closed until most of his students escaped through the windows, but he died after being shot multiple times through the door. One student in his classroom was killed. Instructor Jocelyne Couture-Nowak and student Henry Lee were killed in room 211 as they attempted to barricade the door.
Students, including Zach Petkewicz, barricaded the door of room 205 with a large table after substitute professor Haiyan Cheng and a student saw XXX heading toward them. XXX shot several times through the door but failed to force his way in. No one in that classroom was wounded or killed.
Hearing the commotion on the floor below, Professor Kevin Granata brought 20 students from a nearby classroom into an office, where the door could be locked, on the third floor of Norris Hall. He then went downstairs to investigate and was fatally shot by XXX. None of the students locked in Granata’s office were injured.
So all of these actions were taken, and many more besides, but the simple action of pulling out a gun and putting a few rounds into someone was too much to hope for? Even a few rounds toward the criminal would have slowed him down enough to allow more people to get out of windows to safety.
Colin will forever remember laying on the floor of that classroom, helpless to defend himself from a rampaging maniac. He wants to make sure that you don’t have a gun. Since he knows how it feels to be helpless, how can he justify making sure that you are helpless too?
* – All references from Wikipedia have had the perpetrator’s name changed to “XXX” in accordance with my policy against giving publicity to criminals
Why do we argue against gun control fanatics? We could just ignore them and hope that they go away. We could trust in the innate ability of normal humans to see whack jobs and discount them and their causes.
But we don’t. We have seen what happens when we fail to protect our rights. When you fail to prepare the ground before a fight, you end up fighting on the ground your opponent has chosen for you. Think of football. When the offensive line runs into the defensive line, does the defense just stand there flat footed? No, they charge in, hoping to knock them back and hopefully sack the quarterback. It should be the same with us.
I have enjoyed sparring with japete. And by sparring, I mean smacking her over the head with reality. The reality doesn’t sink in, but it’s helped me refine my arguments. It seems to me that one month ago I was far more likely to argue the specific gun grabber plan than I am now. This means two sides arguing over how much of their plan will be implemented. They ask for X, we counter with 0, they get some value between 0 and X. Lather, rinse, repeat, and the ratchet tightens still further.
I have a better plan now. Each time someone proposes further infringements on my rights, I counter with an attack on the previous infringements. The antis depend on people believing that the antis are “reasonable” folks looking for “common sense” solutions. We both know that is pure, unadulterated horse manure, but the average voter may be taken in by the nice suit Paul Helmke wears, along with the suave way he wipes the foam from his lips. (Gratuitous Miles Vorkosigan reference) The whole shtick relies on us accepting the premise that Government gun control will have some positive effect on crime rates, if only we have the courage to pass for the right law. Since the premise is horse crap, why do we argue as though it is true? Why do we cede to our enemies that moral high ground? (And they are enemies to us, even if we are not enemies to them!)
I ask the gun grabbers to show me any evidence that the current set of infringements on our right to keep and bear arms is effective in any way at reducing crime. Instead of asking them to prove that future infringements will work, ask them to show how previous ones have worked. Keep hammering the point that nothing they have tried so far has worked, and so we should scrap it all.
During 2000–2002, the Task Force on Community Preventive Services (the Task Force), an independent nonfederal task force, conducted a systematic review of scientific evidence regarding the effectiveness of firearms laws in preventing violence, including violent crimes, suicide, and unintentional injury. The following laws were evaluated: bans on specified firearms or ammunition, restrictions on firearm acquisition, waiting periods for firearm acquisition, firearm registration and licensing of firearm owners, “shall issue” concealed weapon carry laws, child access prevention laws, zero tolerance laws for firearms in schools, and combinations of firearms laws. The Task Force found insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws or combinations of laws reviewed on violent outcomes. (Note that insufficient evidence to determine effectiveness should not be interpreted as evidence of ineffectiveness.) This report briefly describes how the reviews were conducted, summarizes the Task Force findings, and provides information regarding needs for future research.
Make them argue that we need to retain an obviously flawed system that has no practical benefits while you continually point out the flaws and drawbacks. Keep forcing them to make the case for the CURRENT mess instead of giving them free reign to ask for more infringements. Basically, when they ask for X, you should counteroffer X minus infinity. Make them justify even the smallest infringement with facts instead of feelings, and the average American will start to see how unreasonable they are and how their “common sense” is neither.
Only when you have prepared the ground this way will calling them bigots and fear mongers start to work. Once you have broken their image of reasonableness you can start to attribute evil thoughts to their unreasonable actions.
Mikey Bloomberg, Mayor of New York City, and his new astroturf group, Americans United for Safe Streets, have decided to target 4 Republicans for failing to “take a stand to close the (gun show) ‘Loophole.’”
The 4 targets are Pat Meehan (PA-7), Tom Ganley, (OH-13), Keith Fimian (VA-11), and Rocky Raczkowski (MI-9), 3 in districts labled as “toss up,” one in “leans Dem” by Real Clear Politics.
Our favorite gun grabber, japete, wanted us to know that this campaign
“it puts elected officials right on the spot where they should be- having to defend being beholden to the NRA and voting against measures to save lives.”
Saves lives? “Crime guns” don’t come from gun shows.
• A 2006 FBI study of criminals who attacked law enforcement officers found that within their sample, “None of the [attackers’] rifles, shotguns, or handguns … were obtained from gun shows or related activities.” Ninety-seven percent of guns in the study were obtained illegally, and the assailants interviewed had nothing but contempt for gun laws. As one offender put it, “[T]he 8,000 new gun laws would have made absolutely [no difference], whatsoever, about me getting a gun. … I never went into a gun store or to a gun show or to a pawn shop or anyplace else where firearms are legally bought and sold.”4
• A Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) report on “Firearms Use by Offenders” found that fewer than 1% of U.S. “crime guns” came from gun shows, with repeat offenders even less likely than first-timers to buy guns from any retail source. This 2001 study was based on interviews with 18,000 state prison inmates and is the largest such study ever conducted by the government.5
• Previous federal studies have found few criminals using gun shows. A 2000 BJS study, “Federal Firearms Offenders, 1992-98,” found only 1.7% of federal prison inmates obtained their gun from a gun show.6 Similarly, a 1997 National Institute of Justice study reported less than 2% of criminals’ guns come from gun shows.7
But facts be damned. What they are after is a slow ratchet toward universal registration. First confine sales to “authorized” salespersons. Then keep good records. You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to figure that one out. Preventing the private sales of firearms makes having a gun registry a simple technical challenge. A registry becomes a target list just as soon as someone gets stupid enough to think he can get away with confiscating the guns.
What do you think is going to happen on election day? Let’s look at each of the 4 people.
Pat Meehan (PA-7) – running for the House seat vacated by Joe Sestak, the Admiral who was fired from his Navy job forbeing an absolute jerk and is currently getting his guts stomped out running against Pat Toomey. Meehan is currently +3, +1, & +4 on the three polls listed.
Tom Ganley, (OH-13) – The underdog in this pile. He’s being sued for sexual harassment and has pulled his campaign ads. The polls show his opponent +2.
Keith Fimian (VA-11) – In a district that is slightly Dem, there are no polls listed. Still listed as “Toss up”
Rocky Raczkowski (MI-9) – Two polls, one for each candidate, RCP calls it a toss up.
Clearly what Bloomie is trying to do is influence a couple of close elections in hopes of keeping the Dems in power. If he wins he also plans on using that to tell the Dems “See, gun control isn’t such a big loser after all!” He thinks that you are stupid and won’t see through his transparent efforts. It is up to us to point out these gun control measures for what they are, attacks on our freedom.
I think that given the mood of the nation that we’ll win 3 or 4 of these races. $500,000 is chump change to Michael Bloomberg, so he’ll never miss it. Just don’t forget that whenever you hear “Americans United for Safe Streets,” your mind should automatically translate that into “Mike Bloomberg.”
Let’s hope that we get to enjoy rubbing her (and Bloomie’s) face into a big election day victory. If you are in one of those four districts, you know who to vote for.
Have you voted yet? North Carolina’s early voting system worked pretty well for me. I cast my ballot during the lunch break of my Hunter’s Safety class on Saturday, and I took my wife to the polls on Monday. They even have curbside voting if you are unable to get out of the car. Get on out there and vote. You still have a chance to register and vote at the local One-Stop, so no excuses for sitting this one out.
Less than a year ago I moved to North Carolina from Pennsylvania. I spend quite a bit of time running down NC laws that I think are silly or just plain stupid, but I wouldn’t move back if you paid me. You NC natives may as well just start calling me a Damn Yankee, because the difference between a Yankee and a Damn Yankee is that the Damn Yankee stays. Actually, according to Days of Thunder (starring Tom Cruise), I’m not really a Yankee either. I was born and raised in California, and if you’re from the West, you ain’t really nothin’.
I’d like to tell you about my favorite law from Pennsylvania. It’s even better than the total lack of laws in PA relating to guns and alcohol. Yes, in PA, you can carry a gun and get totally drunk if you want. I recommend that you don’t drink around firearms, it’s as stupid as drinking and driving, but in PA it’s not illegal. Even better than that is the law in PA that requires all State level courts to provide lockers for all people who are carrying a gun.
(a) Offense defined.–A person commits an offense if he:
(1) knowingly possesses a firearm or other dangerous weapon in a court facility or knowingly causes a firearm or other dangerous weapon to be present in a court facility; or
(2) knowingly possesses a firearm or other dangerous weapon in a court facility with the intent that the firearm or other dangerous weapon be used in the commission of a crime or knowingly causes a firearm or other dangerous weapon to be present in a court facility with the intent that the firearm or other dangerous weapon be used in the commission of a crime.
(e) Facilities for checking firearms or other dangerous weapons.–Each county shall make available at or within the building containing a court facility by July 1, 2002, lockers or similar facilities at no charge or cost for the temporary checking of firearms by persons carrying firearms under section 6106(b) or 6109 or for the checking of other dangerous weapons that are not otherwise prohibited by law. Any individual checking a firearm, dangerous weapon or an item deemed to be a dangerous weapon at a court facility must be issued a receipt. Notice of the location of the facility shall be posted as required under subsection (d).
This is a great law, and the source of one of my funniest gun stories.
Once upon a time I was called for Jury Duty in Lehigh County, PA. For one reason or other I was in the Sheriff’s office the day before (I think I was working on getting my Utah License and needed fingerprints). On the way out of the court building I asked the Deputy Sheriff on guard at the metal detector what the process was for getting a firearm checked. I knew there was a law that said that they had to check my gun if I had one. The Deputy was adamant, leave it at home. I don’t take well to people telling me what to do, especially when they lack the legal and moral standing to offer me advice. This pissed me off. A pissed off Sean is a creative Sean.
Cops like to tell you what to do. I’m not sure if they become cops because they like to tell you what to do or if they like to tell you what to do because they are cops. Chicken and egg. Most cops are sophisticated enough to merely “suggest” a course of action, relying on your natural desire to comply with authority. They know that they cannot order you to do anything that violates your rights, but they aren’t going to stop you if you waive your rights either. Direct confrontation of a police officer usually ends in a pavement tasting contest, and he’s bringing friends. The best solution? Passive aggressive. Make the cop spell out exactly what he wants you to do. Twice or three times is better. Avoid a direct answer. Want to know more? Here’s what I did.
I presented myself to the courthouse security desk with the following items
• 1 Springfield XD .45 ACP Compact with 10 +1 Federal 230gr Hydrashok bullets
• 1 Spare 13 round magazine with same bullets
• 1 Appalachian Trail folding knife
I was carrying my XD and mag in a SmartCarry holster, so it was completely concealed. I held out my PA License to Carry Firearms and waited for the young Deputy to acknowledge that he understood what I was trying to convey. I didn’t think it made a whole lot of sense to make a general announcement that “I have a gun.” Generally that sort of statement leads police to show you their guns. He took my card and showed it to the other Deputy, the one who told me to leave my gun at home. That Deputy gave me a dirty look and told my Deputy to take me upstairs to the Sheriff’s office. My Deputy dropped me off in the waiting area and wandered back into the back of the Sheriff’s office looking for someone who would check my firearm into the locker. Eventually he returned with an older Deputy Sergeant who was taken aback by the fact I was left sitting armed in the waiting area. I thought it was pretty funny. It was clear that the Deputy Sergeant thought that this was a waste of his time and I was not making him happy by insisting on carrying to jury duty. He escorted me off to the side office and said,
“Where is it?”
“Give it to me.”
“Can I clear it?”
I carefully handed him my loaded pistol and was treated to a show while he attempted to drop the magazine. The button was stiffer than he expected, and since he was unfamiliar with my pistol (they carry revolvers) he nearly dropped the mag when he finally got the mag release to work. Then he fumbled for a while trying to eject the round in the chamber. Again, not being familiar with it, he didn’t realize that his hand had to be on the grip safety to make the slide unlock. He did drop the round while he locked the slide to the rear. Then he put the pistol in his hand, middle finger through the trigger guard and cupped both hands to hold the spare round and the 10 round mag. Then he tried to walk away. I let him get a step or two and stopped him with,
“Do you want the spare magazine?”
So I gave him that. The young Deputy behind me asked me where I thought I was going, Bagdad? I shrugged. Apparently 24 rounds of .45 ACP was excessive, in their opinion. I was just carrying the two mags that came with the gun. The Deputy Sergeant started to walk away again.
“How about the pepper spray…” big pause, “and the knife?”
I gave them to him as well. Picture in your mind this Sergeant, his hands overflowing with 1 pistol, two mags, a loose round, a keychain pepper spray, and a folding knife. He looks at me and tries the cop “suggestion”
“You are here for jury duty, right?”
“If you get called back tomorrow, do you think all of this hardware will be necessary?”
I saw the trap coming. Passive aggressive. Avoid the direct answer.
“Well, it’s what I carry every day.”
I could see that the poor man was defeated. His shoulders slumped and he tried to flee.
“I’d like a receipt please.”
If he could have run away with any dignity at all, he would have. He took a long time coming back, but when he returned, he had the most beautifully handwritten property receipt that I have ever seen. His penmanship teacher must have been very proud of him. All the items were carefully listed, including serial numbers. He would have had to take the pepper spray apart to get the info for the receipt. I thanked him and left, following the young Deputy downstairs to go back through security. The whole process, from the time I went through the door until the time I made it to the Jury room on the 6th floor was only 20 minutes.
I was not selected for jury duty. I am sure that my complete and utter contempt for the specimens of legal excellence that were on display in the persons of both prosecutor and defense counsel had something to do with why they dismissed me. That, and I am sure that the Deputy Sergeant called upstairs and told the lady to take me off the Jury list and NEVER call me back.
Leaving was an adventure as well. I got back to the Sheriff’s office after I was dismissed, probably just before lunch. A different Deputy took my receipt and delivered to me a plastic grocery bag filled with all my items. I was directed to place my unloaded pistol in my holster and carry the rest. I would be escorted to the door, 1 floor down.
“Can I load it here?”
“No, take it to your car.”
“You want me to walk across 3 city blocks in downtown Allentown with an unloaded pistol?”
“Then do it outside.”
“Are you planning on standing next to me when I load my pistol on a busy downtown public sidewalk right in front of the County Courthouse? Because I don’t want to think how the city police will react when someone reports a man loading a gun right outside the courthouse. I might get shot by mistake.”
He saw the logic in my statement. On the way to the door he let me into one of the probation offices and told me to go ahead and load my pistol there. Then he escorted me to the door. I thanked him for his assistance and wandered off, probably into Sheriff’s office lore, a story to be told to new Deputies over beers after a long day guarding the courthouse.
Passive aggressive. Avoid the direct answer. Exercise your rights. If you don’t use them, you may as well not have them. Flex your Rights, you might say.
North Carolina bans firearms from State buildings and allows localities to ban them in their buildings as well. We should insist that if guns are banned, proper security must be in place, including both armed guards and metal detectors. No sense trying to pretend that crime works on the honor system. The only ones honoring the “No guns allowed” signs are you and me, the honest, decent citizens. The criminals are just going to walk on by the sign, secure in the knowledge that no one in those buildings can defend themselves. They should also require lockboxes for those of us who choose to carry defensive arms. Criminals don’t necessarily need to come into the building to get us. Some of them just wait in the parking lot. To them it’s like a buffet. Except the dishes come to them.
Laws of North Carolina that need to change, Part 12 – No guns in State Parks (UPDATE 12-01-11 REPEALED!)
UPDATE: 12-01-11 Repealed!
HB650 repeals this part of NC Law. Rejoice! Now you are not required to be an easy target just because you want to take your children to a State Park.
In North Carolina, parks and recreation areas are considered victim disarmament zones.
(a) No person except authorized park employees, their agents, or contractors, or officers of the state shall carry or possess firearms, airguns, bows and arrows, sling shots, or lethal missiles of any kind within any park.
I guess you get to choose. Do you like nature? Or your life? Unless you are hunting, leave your gun at home. I guess North Carolina thinks shooting a deer is fine but shooting a rapist and murderer is not allowed. Here’s a helpful list of places you should avoid with your lawfully carried firearm.
Laws of North Carolina that need to change, Part 11 – No Crossbows without a permit (UPDATE: 5-9-11 REPEALED!)
Did you know that North Carolina requires you to have the same permit to buy a crossbow as to buy a pistol?
(a) It is unlawful for any person, firm, or corporation in this State to sell, give away, or transfer, or to purchase or receive, at any place within this State from any other place within or without the State any pistol or crossbow unless: (i) a license or permit is first obtained under this Article by the purchaser or receiver from the sheriff of the county in which the purchaser or receiver resides; or (ii) a valid North Carolina concealed handgun permit is held under Article 54B of this Chapter by the purchaser or receiver who must be a resident of the State at the time of the purchase.
UPDATE: 12-01-11 partial improvement
HB650 limits localities ability to ban firearms in parks to certain areas, including playgrounds, athletic fields, athletic facilities, and pools. It also requires localities to allow carriers to lock weapons in personal vehicles in parking lots.
It’s not perfect, but it is a slight improvement. We will have to seek more next year.
This is a partial text of NC’s Pre-emption law.
(a) It is declared by the General Assembly that the regulation of firearms is properly an issue of general, statewide concern, and that the entire field of regulation of firearms is preempted from regulation by local governments except as provided by this section.
(e) A county or municipality may regulate the transport, carrying, or possession of firearms by employees of the local unit of government in the course of their employment with that local unit of government.
(f) Nothing contained in this section prohibits municipalities or counties from application of their authority under G.S. 153A‑129, 160A‑189, 14‑269, 14‑269.2, 14‑269.3, 14‑269.4, 14‑277.2, 14‑415.11, 14‑415.23, including prohibiting the possession of firearms in public‑owned buildings, on the grounds or parking areas of those buildings, or in public parks or recreation areas, except nothing in this subsection shall prohibit a person from storing a firearm within a motor vehicle while the vehicle is on these grounds or areas. Nothing contained in this section prohibits municipalities or counties from exercising powers provided by law in declared states of emergency under Article 36A of this Chapter.
North Carolina’s preemption law is weak in two areas. First it allows localities to regulate the carry of firearms by their employees. I don’t believe a government should be permitted to make disarmament a condition of employment. Secondly, it allows local governments to turn their buildings, grounds, and parks into victim disarmament zones.
There are many different blogging styles. Some people bombard you with information. Others show you all the cool links. And some (who shall remain linkless) just act like a**holes in your comments hoping that you will follow them back to their blogs and “debate” them. They even go so far as to add “co-bloggers” whose only purpose is to try to dig up information about their rivals and post it. This is the story of one such co-blogger.
For those who know and *love* him, enjoy the following video. Narcissistic jerks don’t make me angry, they just make me laugh. Now you can laugh at him too. Rated PG-13 for language.
JadeGold, Double-O Nothing
I post under my real name. This is my real life. I’m laughting right now.
For those with non Flash Video compliant mobile devices, Click here to watch at YouTube.