September 2007 – Page 3 – Shall Not Be Questioned

American Airlines Issue

Some of you may know that American Airlines banned firearms on overseas flights to Europe and Asia.Â Needless to say that makes it a little difficult for competitors and hunters to attend competitions and hunt in other countries.Â Â I originally found out about this from the AA web site, that I had to look up because I’m using AA to fly to the GBR.Â Fortunately, it looks like we’ve made some progress here with the company:

“After a series of meetings, involving NRA and Safari Club International (SCI), we are pleased to report that there has been some progress. American Airlines has decided that it would amend its policy to allow legally declared firearms to be transported on nonstop flights to other destinations in Europe outside of the UK, and to Asian destinations. We have been informed that due to continuing onerous policies by the government of the United Kingdom, American Airlines is still not allowing civilian transport of firearms into the UK at present.

That’s good news.Â It would seem the UK government was the responsible party for this whole policy. Â This is another significant illustration of the danger of the international gun control movement, which I’ve detailed here before.

Good News for Dave Hardy

Dave just won a First Amendment case invalidating part of the Arizona Constitution.Â Â Good deal!Â You want my opinion, the whole primary system stinks.Â I don’t think political parties should be able to hijack the voting apparatus of the state for selecting candidates, orÂ the other way around.Â That’s just bad public policy.

But I think open primaries tread on the First Amendment’s freedoms of association.Â If you’re going to let the state hijack the selection of candidates for parties, you should have to choose a party association.

Personally, I think all the states should do it the Iowa way, with caucuses.Â All that stuff should happen outside the structure of the state.Â There are ways you can structure ballot rules to be fair to the major parties, and to third parties, without letting every yahoo group onto the ballot.

GBR News

There’s been a new development for the Gun Blogger Rendezvous. We will be having an NRA happy hour event on Friday starting at 2, with two our friends from the association:

Glen Caroline, Director of NRA Grassroots Division
Ashley Varner, NRA-ILA Public Affairs

We’re very pleased to have them come by and talk to us bloggers. It’s not too late to get yourself out to the GBR. Mr. Completely is looking for a few more good men or women to register and come out, and SayUncle is looking for a few more folks to take money from at the poker tables.

So get your rear in gear and out to Reno on October 11th, 12th, 13th.Â We’d love to see you.Â You don’t have to be a blogger to go!

A Bit on Section 302 of MHPA

I notice Larry Pratt keeps bringing up a Pennsylvania case where a man was committed involuntarily for observation under Section 302 of Pennsylvania’s Mental Health Procedures Act. This provision is described as follows:

Section 302 is the part of the Act relating to treatment without consent for observed behavior constituting a clear and present danger to the individual and/or others. The behavior must have occurred in the past 30 days. Under Section 302(a) any responsible party can petition for an involuntary evaluation by stating that an individual may be severely mentally disabled.

Now, it should be noted that for purposes of a federal firearms disability, this section is insufficient. The regulations specifically exempt persons held for observation.

Committed to a mental institution. A formal commitment of a person to a mental institution by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority. The term includes a commitment to a mental institution involuntarily. The term includes commitment for mental defectiveness or mental illness. It also includes commitments for other reasons, such as for drug use. The term does not include a person in a mental institution for observation or a voluntary admission to a mental institution.

But that’s federal. The PA Uniform Firearms Act is also a controlling law:

A person who has been adjudicated as an incompetent or who has been involuntarily committed to a mental institution for inpatient care and treatment under section 302, 303 or 304 of the provisions of the act of July 9, 1976 (P.L.817, No.143), known as the Mental Health Procedures Act. This paragraph shall not apply to any proceeding under section 302 of the Mental Health Procedures Act unless the examining physician has issued a certification that inpatient care was necessary or that the person was committable.

So unless the person actually ends up being involuntarily committed to a mental health institution, there’s no prohibition under federal or state law that prevents him from owning a firearm in the future, unless he’s committed.Â It should be noted that Pennsylvania already has a mechanism in place for restoration of rights for commitments and adjudications.Â In the editorial I mentioned last, a PA district attorney was quoted as saying:

“I contacted the sheriff and had his license to carry a firearm revoked. And I asked police to commit him under Section 302 of the mental health procedures act and that was done. He is now ineligible to possess firearms [for life] because he was committed involuntarily,” the district attorney reported.

I think that particular DA needs to read the law, because he’s wrong.

This Is Getting Crazy

Folks, it pains me to criticize other people who are on my side, and who I consider allies in the cause, but I feel the need to speak up when I think there’s misinformation getting out there to gun owners.Â WND has an editorial here:

The legislation would allow a person’s right to own a gun in the U.S. to be permanently removed under a wide range of circumstances.

“You’d think that when rabid, anti-gun legislators like Sen. Charles Schumer and Rep. Carolyn McCarthy join together to pass anti-gun legislation, it would raise a few red flags,” the alert says. “But these two New York Democrats are currently planning to roll over gun owners with H.R. 2640 â€“ legislation which would bar you from owning guns if: You are a battle-scarred veteran suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder; or as a kid, you were diagnosed with ADHD.”

Gun Owners Executive Director Larry Pratt told WND that those are just two of the circumstances that legitimately could be used under the pending proposal to permanently remove an individual’s right to own a weapon in the U.S.

This is just not true.Â Read the legislation.Â It goes even further off the deep end:

Someone in counseling during a bitter divorce, a child who at one point gets into a scrape on a school yard and is put on Ritalin, or even someone given “counseling” for issues such as depression during recovery from an accident or work-related injury are some other situations that could trigger such “disarmament by diagnosis,” he said.

There’s no provision in this bill at all that would create that circumstance.Â By now I’ve looked at it pretty extensively, and what Larry is claiming here just isn’t in this bill at all.

The plan, described in Congress as an expansion of the Brady Gun Bill that requires background checks for potential firearms purchasers, would require people who have such a diagnosis in their health record to be permanently banned from owning a gun.

This bill does not do that.Â Gun Control Act of 68 is what gave us life time prohibition for mental health commitments and adjudications.Â HR 2640 actually enables those with mental health problems in their past to clear their names, something they can’t do currently.

I feel like a broken record here, but Larry Pratt’s claims on this issue just keep getting more and more absurd to anyone’s who’s actually read the legislation.

Penndot Woes

Bitter and I have come to hate Penndot lately, because of adding about an hour delay on the trip between here and DC.Â Now she finds that they are probably ruined a potential Turnpike lease deal by not informing the state police there might be foreign men in the area taking pictures.

You know, it’s funny, but since when is taking pictures probable cause for an arrest?Â Though, I suspect that stopping for a non-emergency along the Turnpike is a traffic infraction, and our Supreme Court has said you can be arrested for those at the whim of the officer.

Blogging Peaked?

I’m glad that Glenn isn’t at death’s door, but I’m very interested in the article he linked to:

Tech researcher Gartner Inc. reported earlier this year that 200 million people have given up blogging, more than twice as many as are active.

“A lot of people have been in and out of this thing,” Gartner analyst Daryl Plummer told reporters. “Everyone thinks they have something to say, until they’re put on stage and asked to say it.” Given the average lifespan of a blogger and the current growth rate of blogs, Gartner says blogging has probably peaked.

I’ve been in the IT business long enough to ignore anything Gartner says.Â They get paid a lot of money to make pontifications to people who wouldn’t know a bowl of dog crap from pumpkin pie.Â But there are some insights here in this article, despite what Gartner says:

“Good bloggers work like dogs,” says Michael Parsons, editor of the tech site CNet.co.uk. “You can’t expect readers to show up unless you show up. And the Internet never closes. â€¦ Every successful blogger I’ve come across is the same. Eat, sleep, and drink the work. No time out; no holidays.”

That’s not a recipe for healthy living, especially if you’re working a day job that’s not paying you to blog.

That’s quite the truth.Â In fact, by the time this posts goes up, I’ll be working the day job that pays the bills so I can spend most of my early mornings, lunch hour, and evenings looking for material to blog about.

But that’s not to say it’s a burden.Â I keep doing it because it’s fulfilling, and because I care a lot about this issue.Â I’ve also felt like I’ve run out of challenges in my chosen career.Â Not necessarily because I’ve done everything, but because I’m about as challenged as I’m going to get in what I’ve chosen to do for a living, and what people will pay me good money to keep doing (Well, at least without becoming a paper pushing manager.Â I may have manager in my title, but I still get my hands dirty).

I suppose what drives me to do what I do here is that, for some reason you all choose to come here and listen to what I have to say, I feel obliged to play along.Â I’ve always felt I would do well in a role where I get to do things like that.Â I keep a list of things I would do if I were CEO of the company I work for, but my attempts in the past to influence the direction of the company were met with condescension and ego on the part of our decisions makers.Â I’m not willing to do the paper pushing and ass kissing that’s required to get to the top in that kind of environment.

But for some reason, you all choose to listen to me, and I do appreciate that. Â I’m with Glenn: I’m not dead yet, and don’t plan on going anywhere any time soon.

Foie Gras Bans in Philadelphia

I’m really happy to see with the city murder rate soaring above 300, with the police department in disarray, and with officers getting shot in the face by the scum of humanity, that City Council feels they absolutely have to tackle the problem of Foie Gras being eaten in the City of Brotherly Love. I’m so happy to see that the city’s political leadership has its priorities in order:

Foie gras (pronounced “fwah GRAH”) is the engorged liver of a duck or goose force-fed by a process called gavage. To animal-rights activists, including the Philadelphia group Hugs for Puppies, gavage is cruel.

If you want to be taken seriously as an advocacy group, don’t call yourself “Hugs for Puppies”. Calling yourself that really makes me want to go hang out with Glenn Reynolds and blend a few into smoothies.

Hat tip to West, By God

Quote of the Day

From Arms and the Law reader David Lawson:

It is true we have protection against prosecution for unlawful use of a weapon or failure to register the weapon or possession of an illegal (non-NFA) weapon due to the Hale De Mar act. However, I am certain he will not see that firearm back unless it is sold by the police to some gangbangers that then use it against him.

Emphasis on the part I think makes the joke complete is mine. Also, I’m really happy to see Dave Hardy has set up a new blog:

http://www.chicagohandgun.org/

If Heller wins, it’s because folks like Dave have laid much of the groundwork for the victory. It’s good to see he’s already working on the next step, should Heller prevail before the Supreme Court, as I believe it will. Let’s win Washington, then onto Chicago!

UPDATE: A commenter points out that it might be the commenter Dave, and not Dave Hardy, that has the Chicago site.Â If it is, then great for commenter Dave!Â Doesn’t really change what I said, other than pointing out the fact that there are too many Davids in this issue!Â We gunnies definitely have the biblical metaphors wrapped up.

Michael Sullivan Praised by Congress

Ryan has the scoop on how Sullivan’s confirmation hearings went.Â A little butt kissing in a confirmation hearing is par for the course, but I’m concerned about his statement indicating he’d release more trace data.

Have you sent your letter to DOJ yet? Â Here was mine.