February 2011 – Page 4 – Shall Not Be Questioned

Schumer’s Faulty Metrics

Schumer wants to penalize states that are “not enforcing background checks.” At first I thought this meant perhaps adding a stick to the carrot as far as mental health reporting goes, but that might not be the case:

Under the plan endorsed by Schumer and Bloomberg, states and federal authorities would be required to increase theÂ percentage of denied gun permit applicants to the national gun database.Â The penalty for not reporting would be a loss of federal funding forÂ crime prevention.

Not required to make sure the data in the database is more accurate and up to date, but to just deny more people the right to purchase a gun, with no regard to accuracy? They call the proposal “modest.” If their Thesaurus has the word “stupid” next to “modest,” I might buy that.

I haven’t seen language for a proposed bill, however, so it could very well be this is a case of the journalist reporting writing gibberish in their ignorance of the subject at hand, and perhaps ignorance of clear English as well.

Harry Reid’s “Stimulus”

Or perhaps anti-stimulus. Apparently Reid thinks that ending prostitution in Nevada is going to somehow going to grow the economy:

“One of the businessmen in that meeting told me he simply couldnâ€™t believe that one of the biggest businesses in the county he was considering for his new home is legal prostitution,” he said.

Sounds like a great way to help Nevada’s economy, shuttering the biggest industry in a county. You’d think that would be a fringe benefit to a lot of executives.

More on Whether HR822 Covers New York City

There’s a principle in statutory construction that statutes should be read in a way that gives effect to the will of the legislature. Pretty clearly the language that preempts “the law of any State or political subdivision thereof,” would be key here. But it’s not just that. It’s also what legislators are arguing. The following is from the Congressional Record:

[A]nybody who has a concealed carry permit from the State of South Dakota goes to New York and is in Central Park, Central Park would be a much safer place.

– John Thune, Senator sponsor of the amendment, 7/22/2009

Known gun runners would go to Vermont, get a gun license, get a concealed carry permit, and they could get 20, 30, 50 guns concealed in a backpack, in a suitcase, and bring them and sell them on the streets of the south Bronx or central Brooklyn, bring them to Central Park or Queens, and our local police would have their hands tied.

– Charles Schumer, in the Congressional Record, 7/21/2009

In addition to this, schumer is also on record in the same day’s record saying the bill “would affect every city in the country.” We also have to consider statements by NYPD Commissioner Ray Kelly:

New York City’s strict requirements as to who can carry a concealed weapon have contributed to the city’s unparalleled public safety. Our effort, indeed our entire mission, would be severely undercut by this bill. In a city where 90 percent of all guns used in crimes come from out of State, it is easy to see how S. 845 would pose a danger to New Yorkers by greatly increasing the availability of illegal handguns for purchase.

So clearly on both sides we have ample evidence that legislators on both sides of the issue understand that New York City is subject to this law. I just wanted everyone to be aware there’s two sides to every issue. There may be a plausible reading that suggests NYC is exempted as an off limits place under New York State Law, but there’s an equally plausible, and possibly stronger reading that it is covered.

It would be nice if the language could be made more clear, but great precision is difficult to get out of the sausage grinder of Congress. It’s a given that there will be handful of states, cities, and local municipalities that will challenge whatever language comes out. My concern is people are aware of the risks, and how the language could be twisted and interpreted. Ultimately it is the courts who decide these things, and it’s worthwhile pointing out there are plausible arguments each way.

AZ Star Didn’t Do the Math

The Arizona Star notes:

In all other high-income democracies, it would have been very difficult for Loughner legally to have obtained his weapon. Some of these countries have very few private guns (e.g., Japan, United Kingdom), while others have fairly many (e.g., Canada, Australia, Israel, Switzerland, Finland), but have more restrictive gun laws than the United States.

Actually, Israel has few private guns. But either way, this is news to me. If you actually look at the data, you have to pretend Eastern Europe is largely non-existent for this to be true. Why is it that I, a lowly engineer from a second tier school, can do better statistical analysis than a Harvard Ph.D.? Maybe because I’m not receiving oodles of money from the Joyce Foundation.

Robbery of Pizza Guys

I continue to fail to understand why pizza delivery guys still get robbed, since it seems to be that a significant chunk of foiled robberies that end with a dead armed robber involve pizza delivery guys. It seems to happen about once a year in Philly. I’d have to imagine if you calculated the odds, you’re probably less likely to die robbing a bank.

Unsurprising

Rahm wins in Chicago. I don’t think it could have gone any other way. The machine probably would not have allowed it. Rahm was the anointed one.

Language Available for HR822

Thanks to John Richardson for updating with the language. I like the bill overall, as it bases its authority on the 14th Amendment, but does not bet the farm on it, as it also bases it on the commerce power as well. My only concern is I worry the language isn’t clear enough, and leaves some weasel room for states like New Jersey and cities like New York:

(b) A person carrying a concealed handgun under this section shall be permitted to carry a handgun subject to the same conditions or limitations that apply to residents of the State who have permits issued by the State or are otherwise lawfully allowed to do so by the State.

The concern here is that New Jersey’s condition and limitation is chiefly whether or not you have a need. Fortunately, that is clarified a bit in the next subsection:

(c) In a State that allows the issuing authority for licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms to impose restrictions on the carrying of firearms by individual holders of such licenses or permits, a firearm shall be carried according to the same terms authorized by an unrestricted license or permit issued to a resident of the State.

What if New Jersey simply declares that it does not issue unrestricted licenses, and that the restrictions are subject to a needs based test? Clearly that goes against the spirit of the law, but it’s weasel room. Also, my understanding is that a resident of the State of New York that has an unrestricted permit may still not carry within the City of New York, without having a separate permit from the City of New York. I don’t know enough about how New York Law is structured, but I’m not sure this bill will allow you to carry in New York City.

This bill also does not have the same provisions for those in Vermont who do not have the option to get a license to carry, but Vermonters can get covered by obtaining a non-resident license from another state. That provision was likely left out to increase the chance of passage.

UPDATE: From New York Penal Code:

License: Â validity. Any license issued pursuant to this sectionÂ shall be valid notwithstanding the provisions of any local law or ordinance. No license shall be transferable to any other person orÂ premises. A license to carry or possess a pistol or revolver, notÂ otherwise limited as to place or time of possession, shall be effectiveÂ throughout the state, except that the same shall not be valid within theÂ city of New York unless a special permit granting validity is issued byÂ the police commissioner of that city.

So in New York State Law, the City of New York is off limits as a matter of state law, without a license from the City of New York. While this reciprocity bill preempts local law, it does not preempt state law in the matter of where one can and can’t carry. There is a very plausible argument that under this bill, New York City is off limits without a license form that city. Also consider this section:

(d) Nothing in this section shall be construed to preempt any provision of State law with respect to the issuance of licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms.

If people are going to have faith in this bill, the language needs to be rock solid and clear. Otherwise someone is going to end up in prison.

Bean Bags?

Dave Hardy points to this Fox News article that has an astonishing revelation in the case of the murder of Border Patrol Agent Terry:

Terry told us contrary to Border Patrol claims that bean bags were not deployed that night, she claims sources inside the agency have told her family, “Eight bandits came down the trail, Brian’s team yelled, â€˜Policia, Policia,â€™ and he said they started retreating. These eight bandits. But then two of the border patrol shot the bean bags and then they opened fire.”

Imagine you’re running contraband over the border, and a group of men are charging down a trail yelling “Police! Police!” but actively firing their guns. What’s your reaction going to be? I’m going to go on a gut feeling that the police don’t actively fire firearms at suspects unprovoked and am going to make the eminently reasonable assumption that I’m being ambushed by other banditos yelling “Police!” to keep me from shooting back. Either way, hearing crack of gunfire and probably hearing the rounds break branches on the way out, it’s not unreasonable to take defensive action at that point, even if you’re smuggling contraband over the border.

If this was an approved tactic, someone needs to answer for it, because it’s extremely irresponsible. Not only does it put the border patrol agents in jeopardy, the gunman in this case could have a plausible self-defense claim. Even if they were police, shooting preemptively, not in self-defense, is murder, and how can a reasonable be expected to tell the difference between live rounds and bean bags?

PGC To Charge for Public Range Use

Looks like the Game Commission is looking to require either a valid PA hunting license, or a range permit to be able to use PGC ranges throughout the state. Considering that PGC is funded with hunting license fees, and these ranges are maintained solely by the PGC, I think this is a fair move. Anyone who’s frequented Pennsylvania ranges knows they are crowded and poorly maintained. This strikes me as a fair way to manage the resource, provided the fees for the range permits are funneled into maintaining the ranges. Looks like there will be provisions for taking guests and kids too, without them also needing a range permit.

National Concealed Carry Back in House

Introduced by Republican Cliff Stearns and Democrat, Heath Schuler. I’ll be curious to see text. I’m opposed to using the commerce power to accomplish this, but am very open to using Congress’ powers under the 14th Amendment. Due to existing Supreme Court precedent, Congress’ power to do this is somewhat questionable, but I’d prefer Congress interpret its powers under the 14th Amendment broadly, and let the courts be the ones to rebuke them. Many federal judges and Supreme Court justices might be reluctant to second guess the elected branches of government on this matter, especially if the bill passes with bipartisan majorities.