2010 – Page 125 – Shall Not Be Questioned

Berkeley Doesn’t Stand Up to the Man Very Well

I just couldn’t help but chuckle and picture hippies declaring how they’ll fight “the man” on this one. Except, that’s not at all what happened.

In response to a pre-litigation demand letter sent by lawyers for the NRA and CRPA Foundation, on Tuesday, May 4, 2010, the Berkeley City Council voted unanimously to repeal that city’s ban on the possession of certain semiautomatic rifles, which had remained “on the books” as Municipal Code Section 13.47 despite being obviously preempted by state law.

The repeal is the culmination of discussions between attorneys for the NRA and CRPA and the Berkeley City Attorneyâ€™s office. The City of Berkeley initially resisted all requests by the NRA and CRPA to repeal this ordinance. But the City Attorneyâ€™s report to the City Council makes clear that the motivation to finally repeal the ordinance was the threat of litigation from NRA/CRPA.

One person objected to the repealing of the ordinance during public comment, but the City Attorney quickly corrected him that, as explained by the NRA/CRPA letter, this is a settled legal matter for which the City of Berkeley has no recourse.

It’s a good thing in the end. It saves precious litigation money that can be used to fight more meaningful fights. I just find it very funny to see how quickly those radicals in Berkeley back down.

The Unpleasant Reality of Politics

It’s true that money cannot buy votes on election day. But money can buy radio and television ads for a candidate to explain their positions. It can buy yard signs and bumper stickers to raise name recognition. It can buy pizza for volunteers. It can rent the phones needed to do phone banks. It can buy the t-shirts volunteers wear outside of the polling places.

You get the idea. Money is mandatory in politics.

So it’s very disheartening to find out what we thought was a pretty reasonable fundraising surge for one candidate here was actually a personal loan. Unfortunately, Gloria Carlineo, as feisty as she has been on the campaign trail, hasn’t been able to put up very good numbers for her campaign. She has only raised about $5,200.

If she plans to serious take on Patrick Murphy in November, she would have to learn to raise money in a big way. Considering Murphy is one the Democratic Party’s new star fundraisers, and with the huge cost of doing political business in this media market, there’s no room to learn on the job.

This is why Sebastian and I have hoped that some of these Tea Party inspired candidates would consider running for lower offices. It’s not that we wouldn’t like to see them in Congress, it’s just that cutting your teeth in a race so fierce and expensive isn’t likely to end well. I would love to see some of these guys (and gals) on the ballot for state representative in some seats. Hell, there are some Bucks Republicans who I think need to be primaried.

I had a commenter on my blog the other day who admitted he has never been involved in politics before, and that if his favorite Tea Party candidates lose in the primary races this year, he’ll sit out in November. That isn’t a winning strategy. In fact, that guarantees long-term losses. What would be far more productive is for him to help us vote out the biggest tax-and-spend guy in November (Patrick Murphy) regardless of who wins the GOP nomination in May. Then, use the next couple of years to shape some really good candidates for other offices so they can learn how to raise money and build connections on a local and statewide level. That is the way to change things for the long haul.

So if Carlineo doesn’t make it through the primary, I hope she doesn’t drop out of politics. I do realize that the Bucks County GOP leadership have treated her horribly, but giving up isn’t the way to change things. I’ve been to Bucks County GOP events, so I can assure you that we will outlast them. Many of them already have a foot in the grave. It’s just a matter of time, energy, and, yes, money.

Crazed European Protesters

I will never understand why Europeans accept the level of violence from their protesters that they do – they just sit back and take it.

I’ve been watching coverage of Greek protests against spending cuts, and at what point do the citizens lie down and let the anarchy take over? It started with throwing rocks and burning cars. They also destroyed shop fronts & set businesses on fire. Now, the protesters are throwing molotov cocktails directly at police officers in order to set them on fire. Yesterday, they threw one into a bank to kill three people and injure more.

I’d like to think that here, we would tell our police officers to get rid of them with any means available. I can’t fathom that if a radical group started marching through a city, killing bystanders, and trying to set police officers on fire, we would just ask them to push back politely. At what point does your society decide that it no longer wants to defend itself from arbitrary mob attack?

Should Wayne LaPierre be Sent to Gitmo?

According to the Washington Post, NRA should now be considered a terrorist organization for supporting civil liberties.

Is the NRA a terrorist organization?

By George W. Bush’s standard — you’re either with us or against us in the fight against terrorism — NRA chief Wayne LaPierre should be just a few frequent-flier miles short of a free ticket to Gitmo right about now.

The New “Terror Weapon”

The Kel-Tec Sub 2000, because anemic pistol caliber carbines are obviously now the new sprayers of death and destruction, and weapon of choice for terrorists. See, it’s scary because it’s a rifle, but it’s really a pistol. This rifle folds up for compact storage, but it’s unusable in its folded state. New York Times worries that it’s all too easy for them to carry out a Mumbai style attack with one of these.

There’s a reason he didn’t do that kind of attack. He was going for something spectacular. If he had gone for a mass shooting in Times Square, well, it’s been done before, and “shot by police” isn’t exactly the headline your typical jihadist wants. The key difference between Mumbai and here is that our police officers, even the ones in New York City, can generally hit what they shoot at, and aren’t uncomfortable employing their pistols or employing rifles in a Mumbai kind of situation. Even in New York City, where its citizens are forbidden from protecting themselves, I’d give a Times Square shooter about two or three shots before the NYPD drops him.

Bloomberg’s solution is to use the terror watch list to prevent things like this from happening. Which seems to have worked oh so well for keeping this guy out of the country in the first place. These are the people Bloomberg demands we put our lives in the hands of. Personal protection isn’t an option in his world.

UPDATE: To be fair to the New York Times, I thoughtÂ theirÂ article was at least researched. Years ago the ignorance they would have displayed in regards to the guns form and function would have been astounding. They are still playing their old games, but at least now they are getting basic facts right.

Record Sniper Shot by the Numbers

Recently a British sniper made a record shot with a ~~.50~~Â .338LM [I should read] Caliber rifle. Joe Huffman gives it to us by the numbers. This is one thing that consistently amazes me about our opponents demonization of ~~this caliber~~ long range calibers. It’s like suggestion that because we make scalpels freely available, that means surely that unscrupulous individuals will be able to do their own quadruple bypass surgery, and wouldn’t that be just awful? They ignore the tremendous amount of skill, and not inconsiderable amount of luck, that goes into employing rifles at these kinds of distances.

Here We Go Again

Will someone please explain to me why NRA, after allowing carry at their meetings in the past at venues that allow it, such as the Kentucky Expo Center, and the Phoenix Convention Center,Â that they would deliberately not make an effort to letÂ attendeesÂ carry in Charlotte?Â Keeping in mind that with the Phoenix Annual Meeting, they went to great lengths to get the Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control to suspend the liquor license of the convention center for the duration of the Annual Meeting (except for the banquet, whichÂ traditionallyÂ serves beer and wine) so that attendees could carry at Annual Meeting.

Now, in terms of site selection, I am going to agree with everyone that Charlotte, from what I’ve seen so far, is less than ideal, and not just on the issue of carry. I’m going to be an opponent of NRA going back there unless they fix their carry laws, among other things. But NRA has hosted its Annual Meeting in a lot of places, for reasons that I’ve mentioned before. Some of those venues are more friendly to carry than others.

NRA’s official statement about this issue goes as follows:

The claim that NRA does not want members to carry is flat out wrong. Both Phoenix and Louisville allowed concealed and open carry in the convention center. In fact, NRA fought to make sure attendees could carry at those locations.

In Charlotte, just like in every city that we have held our annual meeting, NRA is bound by legal and contractual obligations. We were unable to remove the prohibition due to state, city and convention center regulations.

Some people have mentioned an exception under the law for “A person participating in the event, if a person is carrying a gun, rifle, or pistol with the permission of the owner, lessee, or person or organization sponsoring the event.” This exception has two prongs. First, the person must be a participant. Second, the person must have permission.

While some may suggest that NRA could be the one giving permission, the reality is that NRA would not be the one who would determine whether or not someone is a participant. A prosecutor, judge, and jury would be ultimately making that determination.

Even if NRA declared all attendees participants, a prosecutor could argue that he/she was an attendee, spectator, guest of a member or a ticket holder, so that could not be relied on for a legal defense. And, in the end, it is the person with the gun who would be prosecuted. This is indeed a gray area, but without a clear exception there is a serious risk of arrest and prosecution, and NRA does not want our members risking prosecution.

The fact is if NRA only went to places that allowed CCW in convention centers, we would be limited to 2 or 3 choices. Because of the size of NRA’s conventions, we already are limited with our choices of cities that can accommodate us. We also strive to have regional balance to allow members from all over the country to attend. People should also be mindful that NRA has worked to change laws all over the country. With incremental wins, those who may not be able to carry in a certain location today may be able to do so down the road. After all, Arizona’s gun laws have come long way since we were there last year.

I am hoping this puts this issue to bed. I have no problem with reasonable, informed criticism of NRA, or the site selection committee. There’s a lot of valid points to be made for why Charlotte is less than an ideal site. But in the big picture, I think it’s a waste of time and energy to fret over this particular issue in this particular context. We’d be far better served working to change the laws and the political climate, much like happened in Arizona after the Annual Meeting was held there last year.

Not Backing Metcalfe on This One Either

As a civil libertarian, I have some real issues with what Daryl Metcalfe is trying to bring to Pennsylvania. This sounds great, but the only way to do this kind of thing in a racially neutral way is to have everyone prove immigration status if there’s some reasonable suspicion. Imagine the following traffic stop:

“What the problem then officer? I don’t think I was doing over 100k an hour”

“License, registration and proof of insurance, please.”

“Let me get it oot of the glove box then, eh.”

“Sir, I’m going to have to ask to provide some proof or documentation that you’re in the country legally.”

“OK officer, here’s my Minnesota drivers’ license, registration and proof of insurance.”

“I have reasonable suspicion that you’re an illegal Canadian sir. I’m going to have to ask you step out of the vehicle.”

“But I’m from Minnesota.”

“You sound like a Canadian sir. We’re going to have to sort this out downtown.”

I am by no means in favor of amnesty for illegal aliens, nor against increased border protection, I don’t favor “haven cities,” and definitely not against cracking down on human smuggling. But I do not wish to turn the United States into an “Ihre Unterlagen, bitte.” police state in order to not really fix the problem.

I don’t agree with Dayln Leach on much, but I agree with him on this. It’s disturbing to me that so many lawmakers who recognize importance of the Right to Keep and Bear ArmsÂ as an important individual liberty don’t also recognize the basic right to a presumption of innocence by the government. That’s not just a right for the fair skinned. It’s a right of all people.

Family Traditions & Heirlooms

Even though my family wasn’t anti-gun, there aren’t any traditions of shooting or hunting, and I won’t get any guns passed down to me that are part of some multi-generational tradition. But that’s okay. My first gun was a gift from a special friend and still means a lot to me.

In welcoming a new contributor to Bitchin’ in the Kitchen, this bit in her first post really stuck out for me:

When Samuel was age 14, he saved up enough to buy a $500 rifle with his own money. This was no small feat. He saved for many months â€“ birthday gifts, Christmas gifts, worked at his grandfatherâ€™s farm, as well as around our house, to earn the money to pay for his gun. Itâ€™s an item of great sentimental value, and one he will keep until he decides to pass it on to his grandchildren. With that gun will go many stories of deer taken and deer missed, hunts shared with his father, cousins, uncles, and grandfathers, lessons learned, such as, working hard for something that lasted his lifetime.

Samuel is Virginia Gal’s son, and oh my goodness, there are some adorable pics that she included with the post. Check it out, and maybe I can get Granny – my mom & Virginia Gal’s friend – to talk her into sharing some good game recipes.

Quote of the Day

From Marko, who notes that people are giving Major Caudill a major case of the gay phobia:

Iâ€™m rightly confused, I am.Â If you think that the right to self-defense is a human right, and you donâ€™t like the idea of a gay person exercising it, then it necessarily follows that you donâ€™t think gays should be afforded the whole set of human rights.Â If thatâ€™s the case, then please stay the f[**]^*k off my side.

If you donâ€™t support the same freedoms for everyone, then you donâ€™t support freedom.Â Being in favor of freedom only for yourself and folks mostly like you is no virtue at all.Â It requires no sacrifice, no tolerance, and no brainpower.Â It will also cost you your pet freedoms sooner or later, once you find yourself as a member of the 49% whose cornflakes the other 51% vote themselves the right to pee on.

In the sameÂ veinÂ there’s plenty of people out there who don’t give a whit until it’s their liberty on the line, even though they say they value liberty. I’ve met a few people who areÂ adamiteÂ about both legalizing pot, and socializing the medical profession, all in the name of human rights, of course.

* Note the censorship of the language was mine. Not because I give a s**t about it, but because I understand it trips some people’s web filters who are reading from work, and causes the site to block until the offending word is cleared from the page. I will try in the future to be better about this. It’s also why I have the word p0rn in gun p0rn set with a zero in the categories. BTW, if your work uses those kinds of filters, I have sympathy for you. As an IT professional, I’ve refused on a few instances to censor web pages based on keywords. There are good business reasons not to do so.