Video of Arizona Wal-Mart ND

A few days ago I linked to a story of an Arizona man who is facing charges after his pistol discharged in a Wal-Mart. Now we have the video where you can see this guy walking around the store, gun in hand, and drawing the firearm, dropping the magazine, and putting it back. The video also shows some other highly odd behavior.

I’m going to go out on the limb here and suggest this guy either has some mental or developmental problems. It would seem he was wearing a Department of Corrections uniform shirt, and attended training with them for a brief period of time.

This guy is facing six counts of endangerment, which is a felony in Arizona if it involves a “substantial risk of imminent death.”  I would say this case pretty clearly fits that bill, so this guy is going to be a prohibited person if he’s convicted on just one of the counts, unless the prosecutor wants to plead him down to a misdemeanor. I don’t think that should be the case, considering we have video of his gratuitous gun handling. The evidence would appear to be strong enough there should be no need for a plea deal.

Liking the Chrome

A few weeks ago I decided to try out Google’s release of Chrome for MacOS. The Mac version is only in beta, but I have to say, I’m a fan. It’s faster than Safari and Firefox by far, and I’ve found it to be incredibly stable. Even though it’s a beta, it has yet to crash on me a single time, and it seems to handle keeping a large number of web pages open for a long time with no problem.

It’s crash recovery, however, is not quite as seamless as either Firefox or Safari, so that’s one area that could be worked on. I also tend to prefer to work in individual windows rather than tabs, so that’s one other area I would like to see more user flexibility on. But overall, I think Chrome is a great browser, and I haven’t found myself switching back yet to Safari or Firefox.

Indiana Gun Bills Under Attack

I think there are plenty of good libertarian arguments for why the “Parking Lot” bills pushed by the National Rifle Association elevate one freedom over the expense of others, but I’m not sure these arguments here are among them. The author also seems to make a bizarre case against the Katrina language in the bill:

The National Rifle Association claims that the new law will ” … prevent state or local government authorities from confiscating lawfully owned firearms during declared states of emergency, such as occurred in New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina.”

Really? By what authority did government ever confiscate guns? Do new laws protect constitutions? From who?

They had no lawful authority, but don’t you think it makes sense to have a legal recourse available for addressing such illegal action that doesn’t involve expensive and lengthy federal civil rights lawsuits? It’s a nice idea that the constitution is self-enforcing, but sorry, I don’t want to live in a world where all I have is a promise from public officials.

Read our state and federal constitutions and you’ll find that not even courts were given any power over constitutions. Both are clear and regarding an individual’s right to bear arms.

Ah, now we’re told to read the constitution, which the author has read and clearly understood, unlike the rest of us rubes. One wonders what he thinks “judicial Power of the United States” over “all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States,” means if Marbury v. Madison was wrong? I’m completely open to libertarian arguments against the “parking lot” language in the bill, but simplistic arguments that the constitution is somehow self-enforcing is weak, at best.

Andrew Horning, an adjunct scholar of the Indiana Policy Review Foundation, was the Libertarian candidate for governor in 2008.

I guess I should have skipped ahead to the end. This explains everything.

Radnor Township Considering Resolution

It seems the common tactic once a municipality goes down the whole Lost and Stolen road, realizes they’ve made a wrong turn, but think it’s too late to go all the way back, is to pass a resolution urging the General Assembly in Harrisburg to do something about the issue. That would appear to be the path Radnor Township is prepared to go down.

I’m not really any more enthusiastic about the resolutions than I am the ordinances, but at least the resolutions don’t have legal problems. This is a state, rather than a local issue, and I think local residents still need to demand their local governments don’t waste time and money with a crock like Lost and Stolen.

Winning People Over

Joe has some good advice:

Some of the other commenter’s reminded me of a Libertarian essay or pamphlet I read 10 or 15 years ago. The author pointed out that hard-core Libertarians sometimes have the nasty habit of pushing until they find a point they on which they disagree with someone they are proselyting to. For example, they might find someone agrees that the war on some drugs cannot be won and is more harmful to society than the drugs themselves would be if legalized and taxed like other recreational drugs such as cigarettes and alcohol. The hard-core Libertarian would not try and “cement” that agreement but would go on to some other issue such as elimination of government schools or something. And then “hammer” on the potential new recruit if they disagreed.

This is not the way you recruit people to your cause. When someone sees a glimmer of the light you have been trying to demonstrate you should encourage them. You don’t tell them they are a blind idiot because they can’t see the entire spectrum of ultra-violet, infra-red, and X-ray, beauty to find in so many ways that you know and love. If you are right your viewpoint will grow better through careful nurturing than through pushing more and more new material down their throat until they start gagging.

It can be a long process. Good dialog usually is.

New AR-15 Front Sight Posts in the Mail

High-Power/CMP season is starting at the club. First match was April, which I unfortunately missed because work is leaving me with little energy for much else. But since it was such a nice day yesterday, and I had some time, I decided to go the range for some practice. For the first time I got to shoot my M1903A3. which I bought from a guy at the club late last summer and haven’t yet had a chance to shoot. The first thing that struck me is how much nicer the front sight is over the AR-15.

The ’03-A3 has a thin, crisp front sight. The production AR-15 has a front sight as big as a house. That’s a bit of an exaggeration, but if you’re practicing on an NRA SR-1 target, the front sight is certainly much larger than the target, which makes aiming with any precision an exercise in futility. I decided if I’m going to shoot any high-power this shooting season having this was going to be a must, so I ordered a set from Brownells. I am hoping this will tighten up my groups a bit, since I think the main reason I have a tough time getting everything in the 10 ring with the AR is that I don’t really have a clear picture of where I’m aiming.

Review of Potential Supreme Court Picks

Over at the PA Gun Rights blog, which thanks to Bitter now has an entirely revamped public face, we take a look Obama’s potential picks for the Court. Not shockingly, none of them look good. When the best you can really hope for is Cass Sunstein, it’s not a good day for the Second Amendment.