The Dallas Police Department are hunting one of their own who walked away with more than 15,000 rounds of ammunition. Ouch! In times like this, that really hurts the bottom line – to the tune of nearly $5,000. Only a handful of people had access to the room, and they are reviewing tapes to see if someone took it out a box or two at a time. However, tapes will only take them so far. It appears that the security camera on the locker was recently moved. (Via The Outdoor Pressroom)
Year: 2009
WTF in Wisconsin
Wisconsin’s tourism lobby group is changing their name. Why? Because when it was named the Wisconsin Tourism Federation 30 years ago, the acronym WTF didn’t have any meaning. Nowadays…well, you read the interwebz.
As I told JR Absher, this is really too bad. If they were really innovative, they could have embraced the acronym when appropriate. I could see some great ad campaigns to attract younger visitors playing off the name. Or, since they are a lobby coalition, if a piece of particularly egregious legislation was introduced, it would be a fun political ad that would get the attention of legislative staffers if used properly.
Tim Pawlenty Steps up for 2012
According to Jim Geraghty, Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty is really stepping up the pace on potential presidential ambitions. He has signed many top GOP consultants and created a new PAC to support other GOP candidates across the country this year and next year. Jim does have a few concerns about Pawlenty’s charisma, and it’s a fair concern given the rhetorical skills of Obama.
All good stuff, of course, but I was reminded of a conversation I had a few months ago with a top strategist for one of the Republican candidates of last year. He liked Pawlenty, but said he couldn’t describe himself as a believer: “Do you see Tim Pawlenty being the guy who gets up on a stage in fall of 2012 and rhetorically wins an argument against Barack Obama? No matter how hard I try, I just can’t see it.â€
As he points out, as much as Hillary and the GOP mocked his lofty rhetoric and pointed out the real problems of policies, Obama still won the primary and the election.
During the 2008 election, Gov. Pawlenty came to Pennsylvania as a surrogate on sportsmen’s issues. He warned about Obama’s history on gun rights when he helped kick off the Sportsmen for McCain coalition.
Whether you’re a gun owner or not, Pawlenty would be a huge improvement over the HopeChange we’ve got now.
First Amendment Case for Defeating a Gun Ban?
Dave Kopel makes a pretty compelling case that bans on guns in churches favors some religions over others, and that there may be an establishment clause case to make against them.
Quote of the Day
The Brady Campaign reacts in a predictable fashion:
“The Chicago case is unlikely to have much practical impact on most gun laws regardless of how the Court rules.  Even if the Court were to hold the Second Amendment applicable to states and localities, such a ruling is unlikely to change the crucial holding by the Supreme Court in Heller that a wide range of reasonable gun laws are presumptively constitutional, and that the Second Amendment right is narrowly limited to guns in the home for self-defense. Since the Heller decision, the gun lobby and criminals have brought at least 170 challenges to gun laws or to block criminal gun prosecutions. With only a handful of exceptions, those challenges have failed.â€
You keep right on reading Heller the way you want to. If all you manage to get is that the government can keep guns out of the hands of criminals, I’m OK with that. The other amusing thing, and you can bet Helmke knows this, it doesn’t matter if desperate defense attorneys with criminal clients and Hail Mary Second Amendment claims fail 100% of the time. All that matters is that we win the right cases. This case the Supreme Court has agreed to take is one of those cases.
The stakes are high. The Brady Campaign is pretending the stakes are low. No reasonable observer can really believe that. By downplaying the significance, it gives you a pretty good idea of what they think their chances are. They are already acting like they lost.
A Stinker of A Study
The Joyce foundation has funded a study showing that you’re stupid if you carry a gun. Â You can see the PDF here, but just giving it a cursory look, it has flaws. Let me outline. From the “Methods” section:
Gunshot assault cases caused by powder charge firearms were identified as they oc- curred, from October 15, 2003, to April 16, 2006. The final 6 months of this period were limited to only fatal cases. We excluded self- inflicted, unintentional, and police-related shootings (an officer shooting someone or being shot), and gun injuries of undetermined intent.
Why limit to only fatal cases in the final six months? It’s legitimate to exclude accidental and self-inflicted wounds. But why is it legitimate to exclude police from this? Police carry firearms for self-defense, the same as ordinary citizens. If your premise is that carrying a firearm makes you more likely to be assaulted, it’s not legitimate to exclude police use.
We excluded individuals younger than 21 years because it was not legal for them to possess a firearm in Philadelphia and, as such, the relationship we sought to investigate was functionally different enough to prompt separate study of this age group. We excluded individuals who were not residents of Phila- delphia as they were outside our target pop- ulation and individuals not described as Black or White as they were a very small percentage of shootings (<2%).
It’s legitimate to exclude people under 21 who carry guns, but why is it assumed that anyone over the age of 21 was a legal gun owner? It’s illegal to carry a firearm on the streets of Philadelphia without a License to Carry firearms. Why did the study not exclude people who were carrying firearms illegally? Could it be because you needed people involved in dangerous illegal activity to get the results you wanted? Why exclude people who are not residents of Philadelphia? They are more likely to carry a legal firearm. Why the racial exclusion?
This study is comparing apples and oranges, which is interesting, but not really that useful, and can’t be used to come to the conclusion that an ordinary, law abiding person, who is not involved in the illegal drug trade or involved in gangs, is taking a risk by carrying a gun to defend himself.
We’re Going Back to the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has agreed to hear the incorporation case:
The Court had three cases from which to choose on the Second Amendment issue — two cases involving a Chicago gun ban, and one case on a New York ban on a martial-arts weapon. It chose one of the Chicago cases — McDonald v. Chicago (08-1521) — a case brought to it by Alan Gura, the Alexandria, VA. lawyer who won the 2008 decision for the first time recognizing a constitutional right to have a gun for personal use, at least in self-defense in the home (District of Columbia v. Heller).
Congratulations to Alan Gura, who will be going back before the Court. Let’s hope this works out, but I suspect it will. I think the Supreme Court wouldn’t have taken the case if they didn’t have five votes.
A lot of what we’re seeing from the gun control crowd now, with Bloomberg heading up MAIG, is honestly panic. No New York Mayor has been as big of a pit bull in going after the Second Amendment, but no New York Mayor has ever been faced with the prospect of his own citizens being able to sue to get their civil rights back.
MAIG might be attacking in Pennsylvania, on our home territory, but that’s because Bloomberg knows we will likely soon be attacking the New York City gun control regime, and overturning it. The last time Pennsylvania was invaded, it didn’t work out too well to help preserve the institution that was being fought over. Let’s hope Bloomberg’s luck is about as good as Jeff Davis’.
This is Getting to Be a Common Story
We’re Having an Effect
NRA members all over Ellport received the same postcard and dutifully followed instructions to harass Cisco. The harshest threats were anonymous; those who left a name got a call back offering a personal visit from the mayor to “tell my side of the story.”
NRA spokeswoman Alexa Fritts would not say how many postcards went out, but she insisted the “education campaign” was not meant to intimidate.
Still, Fritts said that survival-minded mayors did have cause for concern: “They know it’s not smart to be on the wrong side of the gun issue.”
That’s good. They are hearing from us. If they don’t leave, we must be vigilant, and teach them a lesson on election day. This is an interesting claim though:
A funny thing happened amid all the fearmongering: Fourteen Pennsylvania mayors left the group, but 25 joined in spite of the pressure.
Really? We’ve been keeping careful watch on MAIG’s numbers here in Pennsylvania, and if 25 new mayors have joined, it’s news to us. MAIG certainly hasn’t posted 25 new members in Pennsylvania on their site. Does Ms. Kinney have a source for this? Perhaps we should ask her.
Congratulations Bob Mensch!
With 80% of districts reporting, NRA endorsed candidate Bob Mensch has won the 24th Senatorial seat in a landslide victory. We have kept that seat in pro-gun hands. Bob’s district spans both Bitter and my EVC districts, plus a little bit of PA-15. so we couldn’t be more thrilled by this result.
UPDATE: Final tally 66% to 30%, with 3.5% going to the Libertarian. That’s a 36 point landslide!