For their own good, you see. This was the 1927 law that banned mailing of handguns through US Post Offices. The more things change, the more they stay the same. I’m reminded of this C.S. Lewis quote:
Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
I think that describes a lot of our opponents in this fight.
I spent the weekend doing good and wholesome thing like making beer, so I did not keep up with the news. I’ll go digging for stories later and post something later. I hate making beer during the summer, because other than the oppressive temperatures and humidity, I have to heat exchange the tap water with a bucket of ice water to get the wort chilled enough. My summer beers will be a Saison and a Leftover concoction that will resemble vaguely and American Amber Ale. It was just to use up ingredients.
Meanwhile, what do you guys think of this? I don’t think it’s any substitute for a good quick-open safe, but it has some interesting features. I think this is the kind of outside the box thinking that isn’t happening when (usually anti-gun) people are thinking about smart guns:
It’s being developed by Zore, which is an Israeli company. At the very least this should encourage safe makers to up their game. I’d love to have a safe that would tell me when someone is diddling with the lock, lets me know the door is open or the tumbler hasn’t been randomized or locked if I leave the house.
Jerry Brown signed the bill that requires serial numbers on all firearms. The basic law says that anyone who manufactures, sells or transfers a firearm must have a serial number engraved on it that has been assigned by the California DOJ. Based on my reading of the bill, it exempts antiques, curios and relics, and any long gun manufactured before the Gun Control Act. So it will at least, as far as I can tell, not compel people to take collectable firearms and destroy their value by defacing them.
“Several dead and 10 injured.” There’s no details yet on whether this is ISIS or not, and early reports are often completely wrong. Given that this apparently involves three gunmen, I’d say an ISIS inspired attack seems more likely than deranged nut job. Funny how ISIS doesn’t seem to have any issues getting guns in Europe, despite strict gun laws. Yet who do they want to disarm here? You and me.
Got back from the doc this morning. I was worried my blood work would come back a hot dumpster fire, but I was happy all my internal organs are functioning normally. BP is down but still too high. I have high LDL (bad cholesterol) but my good (HDL) is also high. She predicts statins in my future, but BP is the immediate priority. Triglycerides were OK. The only real bad news is that I’m pre-diabetic. Liver enzymes were a bit off, but she attributed that to being overweight. I don’t have any problems that can’t be attributed to just getting old.
In short I need to diet, lose weight, exercise, and keep experimenting with anti-hypertensives. So all in all, I feel pretty good about things. It’s all stuff I can manage. Lack of control is a big driver in my fear of medicine, so when I learn it’s stuff I can control through my own actions, I feel a lot better.
Eugene Volokh takes a look at various stun gun bans. A lot of states and localities were moving in the direction of repeal before Caetano v. Massachusetts. So far, post Caetano repeals:
The US Virgin Islands
Baltimore County (though it is still on the books, but the County Attorney has announced it will no longer be enforced)
Philadelphia still has its ban in place, but at this point it’s hard to see how it would be enforceable in light of Caetano. Like I said when the ruling came out, I don’t think anything should be read into that ruling in regards to how the liberal justices would treat a firearms case, but I can’t discount the fact that Caetano was a good ruling. If we can defeat Hillary, and get a few more friendly justices on the Court, it would be possible to build on this ruling in a positive way. If things go the other way, I think we’ll be lucky to hold on to Heller and McDonald.
I hate to admit that, because I don’t like Trump, but that’s the way it is.
In order to avoid the confusion and the caprice that this sort of behavior inevitably yields, I propose a better means of regulating the behavior of the citizenry henceforth: We could call it “the law,” and we could demand that it be written by “legislators” and subject to the strictures of a “constitution.” Crazy, I know.
The whole thing is a hot dumpster fire, but the Massachusetts Court system has been so biased against any idea of a Second Amendment right that the Supreme Court overturned them unanimously on stun guns. I know we’ve gotten this kind of arbitrariness and capriciousness thrown out in other states when they’ve tried it, but I don’t have a lot of faith in the Massachusetts Court system, or the federal 1st Circuit Court of Appeals.
From Politico: “Dems urged to retool their guns message.” Basically Gabby Giffords is nervous that Hillary keeps talking about “taking on the NRA.” Gifford’s focus groups studies are revealing that people have a pretty favorable view of the NRA, and she would prefer Hillary to use the term “gun lobby,” because that’s totally less offensive to gun owners.
Actually, I think there’s a lot of good advice in this article, and I actually hope no one on their side listens. On a positive note:
ARS also developed specific messages to turn out parts of the original Obama coalition of blacks, Hispanics, women and millennials. The latter might actually be the most difficult to persuade. ARS’ pollsters found that millennials’ views on guns track more with the party ID than their age, and other studies have found that younger voters are especially open to gun rights, seeing them in the same vein of personal liberty as gay rights.
But as I’ve said before, it doesn’t matter if they won’t vote on it. What we corporate gun lobby folks need is more single issue or near single issue voters.
Via the Boston Globe. This was done entirely by executive fiat of the Attorney General. You can bet Bloomberg’s fingerprints are all over this:
The directive specifically outlines two tests to determine what constitutes a “copy” or “duplicate” of a prohibited weapon. If a gun’s operating system is essentially the same as that of a banned weapon, or if the gun has components that are interchangeable with those of a banned weapon, it’s a “copy” or “duplicate,” and it is illegal. Assault weapons prohibited under our laws cannot be altered in any way to make their sale or possession legal in Massachusetts.
It won’t apply to firearms purchased before the new rule, but from hereon out, this is the new rule. Things are just going to continue to get worse in blue-model states that Dems control. The only way we’re going to save them is federal preemption, either by the courts or Congress, and if Hillary wins, you can forget the Courts. If you live in those states, I’m sorry, but that’s just how it is. And the worst part? Oregon, Colorado, Washington, all states that for now are blue but still good, are probably most in jeopardy. Pennsylvania is currently controlled by the GOP in both houses, but that won’t last forever.
Gun owners need to wake up, or things are going to get very, very bad in blue and purple states. If you’re in those states and still voting for Dems, you either a fool, or at the end of the day don’t really value your gun rights.