Senator Bob Casey is pushing for more gun control, including gun bans, I might add, in this Philadelphia Inquirer op-ed. There aren’t many comments right now, so I would encourage everyone to go comment. Please let the Senator know what a flip-flopping liar he really is, and make sure the public knows. This guy ran in 2006 as a moderate, with an NRA A rating. He turned out to be a far-left liberal who supports gun bans. Bob Casey completely lied about being pro-gun. People don’t like politicians who are liars, so I think it’s important that everyone know what he is.
I noticed last night the media reported the spree killer attempted a carjacking in Doylestown, which is the seat of my county. What the media didn’t report is that he may have made the error of bringing a knife to a gunfight, and gotten himself shot at by the guy he tried to carjack. They don’t report whether he was hit, but I would bet not. Not the wisest thing to do, to try to carjack people in a state where about one in every 6 adults has an LTC.
UPDATE: I’m told local news sources are reporting the incident may not have happened. I’m still going on the last police statement on the matter, bad spelling and all.
UPDATE: The spree killer has been found dead near his home. He shot himself. So the guy who did the Doylestown carjacking wasn’t him. Now, if it turns out that the guy who claims to have fought off a carjacker was making a false report, trying to be the hero, you can bet your first born the media will be sure to spread that far and wide.
According to Doylestown Borough Council President Det Ansinn, the new enhanced preemption bill recently signed into law by Governor Corbett is “state sanction terrorism.” There’s something to be said for upsetting the right people. CeaseFirePA is similarly incensed, given how hard they worked to convince municipalities to pass these illegal ordinances in the first place. Mr. Ansinn notes in his own comments:
It’s no secret that I own firearms. I also have a concealed carry permit. I grew up with guns.
With that understanding, a law that removes local control and empowers outsiders to litigate, at the cost of the local taxpayers, is batshit crazy.
HB80/Act 192 is offensive pandering to a single industry. It’s going to make lawyers rich and strips your communities of the right to make their own decisions.
The old, “I’m a gun owner, but” line. We accept plenty of context where local governments have no control, especially where Constitutional Rights are concerned. For instance, local governments can’t close down abortion clinics. They can’t limit freedom of speech only to residents. They have to issue permits for public demonstrations in a manner that’s compatible with federal court rulings. They can’t prohibit licensed drivers in Pennsylvania from driving on their own roads, or impose requirements that are incompatible with state law on the matter.
It’s exceedingly difficult to have discussions where your opponents lack an understanding of how the law already works, and are unable to draw on other contexts to support their arguments. The fact is that Doylestown never had any ability to ban guns in parks. Those ordinances are already illegal, and have been from the moment Pennsylvania passed preemption (some time ago, if I recall). If Doylestown chose to try to enforce their ordinances, if the person charged fought the charge in court, they would win. But they would be on the hook to pay their attorneys fees to have the charges dismissed. HB80 changes that, and gives standing to challenge the law without having to first be charged under it. It is a fundamentally just law.
If it hadn’t been for local communities flouting the existing law, HB80 would have been entirely unnecessary.
Simply because she doesn’t like it, Attorney General Kathleen Kane announced she’s refusing to defend the preemption law that passed the Pennsylvania General Assembly earlier this year. The law is being challenged with a lawsuit by a senator who didn’t support it.
While Kane’s office pretends that it’s no big deal to kick it over the Governor’s office to defend, she does so knowing that the legal team will change next year. Governor-elect Tom Wolf isn’t willing to say he’ll defend it, merely that his team will review it only after they take office. In other words, don’t expect anything from him.
In regards to both offices, these elections were largely lost because many voters value Penn State football over their gun rights. I guess those voters didn’t learn the first time that elections have consequences, and now we’re all going to suffer for it.
The only possible good news is that it may take a while for this to get any kind of court date. Until it is actually thrown out, it’s still the law. Because of that, as the article notes, attorneys representing municipalities with gun control ordinances on the books are still encouraging them to repeal quickly. Since Pennsylvania doesn’t seem to be much of a priority for the big bucks of gun control these days, maybe the cities won’t bring them back.
After careful consideration of the iP1’s design, we have determined that it does not satisfy the statutory definition because, as a matter of design, the pistol may be fired by a person who is not an authorized or recognized user. That is, as long as the pistol is situated within 10 inches of the enabling wristwatch, it may be fired by anyone – the authorized user or any other person who is able to pull the trigger. While the system does incorporate a PIN code or a timer to disable the handgun, when the weapon is enabled, there is nothing in the technology which automatically limits its operational use so that it may only be fired by an authorized or recognized user (so long as the pistol is within a 10-inch proximity to the wristwatch component).
Situations may readily be envisioned in which an unauthorized individual gains access to the pistol in close enough proximity to the wristwatch component (by either maintaining possession of the pistol within 10 inches of the authorized user’s wrist on which he or she is wearing the watch, or by forcibly taking possession of the wristwatch), and therefore would be able to fire the weapon, despite the limiting technology. Accordingly, we are unable to conclude that the iP1 design meets all the elements of New Jersey’s statutory definition of a personalized handgun under N.J.S.2C:39-1(dd), and therefore its availability for retail sales purposes will not trigger the operation of N.J.S.2C:58-2.4 (requiring the promulgation of a list of personalized handguns) and N.J.S.2C:58-2.5 (prohibiting the sale of non-personalized handguns).
Some might smell a rat, and perhaps a rat was intended, but this seriously raises the bar on triggering the NJ smart gun law, and is probably a good thing for gun owners behind enemy lines. Complying with this standard will be exceedingly difficult for those who wish to impose smart guns on us, whether we want them or not.
I’ve always been of the opinion that Smart Gun technology should rise or fail depending on what the market wants, but our opponents would never allow that. As soon as the technology becomes available (In the case of New Jersey, even before!), they will do their level best to mandate it, as the Bradys have attempted here. This ruling doesn’t mean we should stop fighting Armatix. Because the antis have shown their hand, no good can come of allowing this to come to market.
Jim Webb looks to be throwing his hat into the ring for 2016. For Democrats these days, Webb would be pretty good on the gun issue. A lot of people think Hillary is going to walk away with it, but I think Hillary is weaker than a lot of people think. Democrats don’t have much of a bench, since most of their political talent has been sucked down the drain with the Obama Administration. Webb’s candidacy makes sense in case Hillary melts down. But I don’t think the left-progressive wing of the Democratic Party, who are now thoroughly in control, would get too enthused over a moderate like Webb, even if he managed to eke out the nod because there was just no one else.
The big problem on guns we’d have with Jim Webb would be Supreme Court appointments. He’d likely be expected to pick solid liberals. Even if he went with moderates, I think we’d have an uphill climb on the gun issue with any Democratic pick. Remember, the next President will pick replacements for at least two of the Heller Five, and realistically probably three, possibly four. A weak 2A supporting Justice would probably amount to a loss for a broad Second Amendment right.
The title is basically my all-time favorite Heinlein line. It was chosen to describe a secondary character, in explicit contrast to ‘He played the hands he was dealt.’ (Because the character in question would absolutely stack the deck and commit other shenanigans along those lines). It’s a useful thing to remember the difference between the two statements when it comes to politics. There’s plenty of ways in politics to “stack the deck,” but in the end, you have to eat what is set before you.
Thus the money paragraph of Megan McArdle’s post on the President’s no-good, very-bad, horribly-wrong speech about immigration
At this very moment, someone is preparing to explain to me that most of these things are only true because the left-wing MSM is so darn unfair to the Republican side. Assume, arguendo, that you are right. Now let me ask you a question: So what?
If the left-wing MSM is indeed biased against you, then your strategy needs to take that into account. Do you have a plan for compelling the left-wing MSM to treat you fairly? If not, then you should not settle upon a course of action that would work, if only this fact were not true. You don’t launch your cavalry regiment against a Panzer battalion on the grounds that you could beat the Germans if only they didn’t have all those darned tanks.
This applies to more than the immigration/impeachment debate kicked off yesterday. It’s all of politics, including firearms politics. The MSM is against us. The judiciary is no better than neutral, and more usually hostile. Those are facts on the ground, that have to be dealt with. We do not live in a perfect world, we live in one where the very notion of armed self-defense by the public is disdained by the policy makers, and the average voter doesn’t care because it makes no difference to them. That’s what has been set before us. We can season the dish, but we are going to eat that food, because that’s all there is.
Despite the legal challenge against the new enhanced preemption law, the law is already paying off. Norristown council has revoked its lost and stolen ordinance.
In light of the recent amendments to the Pennsylvania Uniform Firearms Act, which grant an expansive right of legal standing to individuals and membership organizations to challenge a local gun control ordinance,” the ordinance said, “which further provide for exorbitant damages that can be shifted to the municipality if unsuccessful in defending its ordinance, council has determined that it is in the best interests of the municipality to remove any regulation of lost or stolen firearms.”
It’s amazing how these municipalities were so confident in the legality of these ordinances when they were being passed over objections that they were illegal, are now are suddenly not so confident with the near certainly they will be sued and held accountable.
The Senate GOP has dumped Dominic Pileggi (RINO, Delaware) as Senate Majority Leader in favor of Center County Republican Jake Corman. If there’s any one person who I think deserves the blame for losing the Governor’s mansion, it’s Pileggi. He, along with a handful of other Southeast Republicans, blocked the Corbett Administration from accomplishing anything, including liquor privatization, which was wildly popular with voters, even voters in the Southeast.
If we end up losing on the germaneness issue with enhanced preemption, likewise, you can blame Pileggi and Stu Greenleaf (RINO, Montgomery), who held up the bill long enough that a floor amendment to an existing bill was the only path forward. Maybe now we can see some progress from the GOP Senate, just in time to have everything blocked by soon-to-be-governor Tom Wolf.
I had mentioned before there were issues with germaneness with the preemption enhancement bill, so it’s not surprising to see that a lawsuit has been filed to challenge the law on that issue. Note that having to take this more risky route to pass preemption enhancement wouldn’t have been necessary if it weren’t for intransigence in the part of the GOP leadership of the Senate.
It’s worth noting that there has not been a single prosecution under the numerous “Lost and Stolen” laws that have been illegally passed by municipalities around the Commonwealth, including Philadelphia and Pittsburgh. This is despite the leaders of these cities telling us these laws were critical crime fighting measures. None of this is surprising. The City of Philadelphia hardly ever prosecutes gun violations. They are typically add on crimes that get plead away, or in most cases, the cities just refuse to prosecute. Any city leader in Pennsylvania claiming to need these laws need to explain why they aren’t using the ones they already have. How are more going to help? And maybe since you aren’t using the existing ones, we ought to take those away too.