Coment from Lynn Hoffman

Looks like my post attracted the attention of the man himself:

Hey, c’mon fellas, lighten up! Do you get your ramrods all bent out of shape when the fictional crimes are murder? This is just windshields. A lot of us have lost things to gunfire that were a lot more precious than windshields.

Anyway, I look forward to seeing a whole bunch of you at the White Dog on the 15th. Just check your expectations at the door.

White Dog is a restaurant right off my alma mater’s campus. I would actually go, if I weren’t flying back from Reno at that time.

I understand that Mr. Hoffman’s work is one of fiction, and I will admit I have not read it, except for the sample first chapter. I don’t get bent out of shape when fiction portrays murder, but I wouldn’t particularly want to write or read a book where the sympathetic protagonist was a serial killer. While shooting out the windshields of gun owners who are members of organizations to protect their interests does not amount to murder, forgive me if I’m a little indignant about the idea being presented in a sympathetic light.

People have lost more to violence than just a windshield, but neither me, my readers or gun blogging colleagues have anything to do with that.  Would it be fair to suggest the American Homebrewer’s Assocation (a fine organization, BTW) is responsible for drunk driving deaths?  I don’t think so.

I’m sympathetic to people that have lost loved ones to violence, but that doesn’t mean they get to extract whatever political concessions they want out of me. Taking away the guns of law-abiding people isn’t going to fix the problem.

Taking Clayton to Task

Over at The Other Sebastian’s. I’ve said before I don’t agree with Clayton on this stuff. I agree that the people in those pictures are weird (Not work safe, or really safe anywhere. Don’t say I didn’t warn you), and that’s definitely not my kind of fair, but other than thinking they are a few dune buggies, an autogyro, and a big tanker trunk away from making a pretty good movie, it’s not something I’m liable to get too worked up over. I kind of expect San Francisco to be creepy at this point.

But either way, do we know that the majority of the gay community condones this stuff? None of the gay people I know would be caught dead at something like this. I would be wary of painting an entire group of people with so large a brush, lest people do the same to us. I think most gay people are no more S&M freaks than gun owners are government hating militia types.

UPDATE: For the record, if people are into that stuff, I have no problem. By the same token, I don’t really care of a bunch of guys want to get dressed up in fatigues and go play army. Not my kind of thing, but I support people’s right to do either.

Police-Style Rifles

Ahab and Uncle point out that when a deranged police officer goes on a rampage, it’s a police-style rifle, not a high-powered baby killing assault rifle.

David Hardy notes that the silence from the anti-gun community over this whole incident is deafening.  Not surprising.   It would interfere with their narrative that all the specialized firearms training that they claim police officers get makes them immune from the same human failings as the rest of us, and thus they can be trusted with guns, while the rest of us cannot.

Attention Police Officers

If you want to know why I think police need to stick with us gun nuts?  This is the reason:

That said, there appears to be far greater leniency with respect to the carrying, and use, of weapons by members of law enforcement in this country than is desirable.

Interestingly, as you know, police officers in Great Britain don’t carry guns, and that country has a much lower incidence of violent crime.

These people have absolutely no regard for officer safety at all.  They will put the lives of our police officers in jeopardy in order to quell their irrational fear.  They do not understand the nature of police work, nor do they care to.

Off duty carry is important for an officer’s safety, because the bad guys don’t have any concept of “off duty”.  5:00 doesn’t roll around and they suddenly become respectable family men.  If they get our guns, they will come restrict police guns next.  It’s not about fighting crime, it’s about feeding an irrational fear.

Hat tip to SayUncle

Gun Rights Police Conference

Dave Hardy and Clayton Cramer were in attendance and are blogging about it.  Clayton also talks about some scary encounters with Ron Paul supporters.  I’ll admit,  don’t really get the cult of Ron Paul either.  Granted, the guy is great on the gun issue, but I think hugging him is actually going a bit overboard.

I don’t like any politician that much.

On Prohibited Persons

I came across this sad story on Pennsylvania Firearms Owners Association forum. A guy seeking advise about renewing an expired PA License to Carry Firearms. Seems he got into a bit of hot water with the law, under this Pennsylvania law:

Title 18, Section 1.4(a) of the unconsolidated statutes.

§ 1.4. Altered or illegally obtained property; penalty.

(a) Alteration or destruction of vehicle identification number.–Any person who alters, counterfeits, defaces, destroys, disguises, falsifies, forges, obliterates or removes a vehicle identification number with the intent to conceal or misrepresent the identity or prevent the identification of a motor vehicle or motor vehicle part commits a felony of the third degree and, upon conviction, shall be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than seven years or a fine of not more than $50,000, or both.

That’s a felony. Clearly this individual must have been involved in some sort of criminal ring. Right? Well, here’s his story:

I bought 2 cars, one from maryland the other from new york. the person i got the maryland car from got it from an auction in deleware. He never transfered it to maryland and kept it for 3 years. I bought it brought it home and could not get the title transfered. tried contacting the auction house in deleware but out of buisness. so i could not get the title transfered. the newyork car was wrecked but had a good motor and interior. the maryland car did not. the vin was attached to the dash, not to the car it’s self. so when I replaced the maryland cars riped upi dash with the nice shiney newyork car dash the vin went with it cause it was rivited to the dash. you get the picture. I called everywhere to find out what to do and every dmv or berriks I called told me to call the other guy. so basicly I am screwed because state employees of pa,maryland and delaware don’t know the jobs. A victim of circomstance (i know my spelling is bad haha) that my luck.

So he installed the dash from one car into another, and forgot the transfer the VIN number. He got caught, and apparently some turd of a District Attorney decided to throw the book at him, either for the safety of society, or to bolster his legal career, I’m sure you can guess which one. The poor guy runs out of money to pay attorneys, and ends up getting pressured to cop a guilty plea in exchange for a year of probation. Only problem; no one advised him he was surrendering his firearms rights.

I am not opposed to the idea that people convicted of certain crimes of violence can have their right to own a firearm removed. But this whole incident illustrates why this idea has become a mockery of justice. This man was wrongly charged, was pressured to plead guilty by an ambitious DA who was more concerned with his conviction record than justice, and now has been screwed out of an important constitutional right.

Fortunately, he says he currently doesn’t own any firearms, which is good. I’d hate for him to twice be a victim of the justice system. If organizations like the Brady Campaign want to be serious about keeping guns out of the hands of dangerous people, and want us to stand with them, they have to condemn applications like this. Otherwise it’s just another means of harassment, and it’s wrong.

Parking Lot Law

Looks like the federal courts aren’t going for it. I really don’t like this reason:

The federal district court bought their argument that the state law conflicted with the federal 1970 Occupational Health and Safety Act, which requires employers to minimize workplace risks.

The Supremacy Clause reigns, I suppose. So now the OHSA requires employers to ban guns in the workplace? That’s what this would appear to be saying. Someone needs to explain to me what all this has to do with interstate commerce again.

Clarification on the Machine Gun Issue

I don’t mean to make it seem like I’m suggesting we ignore the machine gun issue, pretend it doesn’t exist, and not talk about it.  Far from it.   There’s a big difference between talking about the issue, and getting on CNN or another national news outlet and saying “Why yes, we support in legalizing machine gun ownership.”

All I am saying is that it’s not time right now to have a national debate about this.   That is step 32, and we are on step 4 or 5 at most.   So if we want to move the ball forward, what do we do?

I’ll leave the comment section of this thread for folks to offer constructive suggestions on how we can get from our current state, up to being able to seriously petition congress and the public to agree to liberalize the current Title II machine gun provisions.  Remember that the starting state is the vast majority of the public, and Congress, being hostile to your idea.

Wisdom from Countertop

Countertop made a comment over at Uncle’s that I wanted to highlight here, because he’s so very right:

Because if you don’t message well, then you risk throwing the whole thing in the toilet.,

don’t get greedy. don’t read into what Cox said. don’t think anyone outside the gun culture things you have any right to machine guns.

If it becomes a debate about access to machine guns, we all lose.

You class 3 folks need to get over it, get off your high horse, and realize we are all in this together and its going to take baby steps to get it all back. We are close. We are real damn close, but somehow for ever 5 steps forward we take the nuts (at the urging of GOA I suspect) insist on pushing us back 6.

I try to be a bit more diplomatic than that, but he is right, and sometimes it takes spelling out in harsh terms to get it out there to folks. There’s just no way to win on this issue right now. It’s “hearts and minds” time on the issue.

UPDATE: More wisdom from Bitter.