2011 – Page 146 – Shall Not Be Questioned

The Need to Move Swiftly

Today, the full Senate is scheduled to take up Castle Doctrine according to an NRA email sent last night. Considering we waited the entire legislative session to see any serious action last year, the lightening speed of this is just amazing. However, there’s good reason.

Today is also the day that the Governor hands down the budget with massive cuts expected. And on top of that debate, we have to deal with redistricting. It’s a busy legislative session for a lot of reasons, so it’s a good thing we’re getting the major work on Castle Doctrine done now.

Memorial Day Weekend Blogger Shoot

The folks at Lucky Gunner are sponsoring a Memorial Day blogger shoot, and it looks like a pretty good time. How could you not love this:

You will get to shootÂ free ammo through a bunch of cool,Â Class III (including full-auto) weapons (and your own weapons as well).

You don’t have to ask me twice. I may not have a job in May, but I’ll be going even if I have to beg for gas money. That’s not all they are planning though. So if you’re a blogger, I would consider pre-registering. It looks like a good time.

Felon-in-Posession Upheld in Third Circuit

The Third Circuit Court of Appeals, which covers Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Delaware, argue that the “presumptively lawful” language in Heller is not dicta, under the following criteria:

We agree with the Second and Ninth Circuits thatÂ Heller‘s list of “presumptively lawful” regulations is not dicta. As we understandÂ Heller, its instruction to the District of Columbia to “permit [Heller] to register his handgun [and to] issue him a license to carry it in the home,” was not unconditional.Â See Heller, 554 U.S. at 647. Rather, it was made expressly contingent upon a determination that Heller was not “disqualified from the exercise of Second Amendment rights.”Â Id. The District of Columbia could comply with the Supreme Court’s holding either: (1) by finding that Heller was “disqualified from the exercise of Second Amendment rights” under a “presumptively lawful” regulation (such as a felon dispossession statute); or (2) by registering Heller’s handgun and allowing him to keep it operable in his home.Â Id. Accordingly, the Supreme Court’s discussion inÂ Heller of the categorical exceptions to the Second Amendment was not abstract and hypothetical; it was outcome-determinative. As such, we are bound by it.

The Court probably did us a favor by preventing felons from testing the limits of the Second Amendment. I think the Third Circuit is on solid ground here. On considerably less solid ground is that among these “presumptively lawful,” restrictions on keeping and bearing arms is pretty much anything the courts or gun control activists think is reasonable. I would also argue that laws banning certain misdemeanantsÂ from possessing arms is neither longstanding nor covered in this opinion. Many courts have taken bans on misdemeanants seriously, but others have not.

Channeling Admiral Ackbar …

… or perhaps a bad Fark meme. I wouldn’t go anywhere near this.

Federal Overreach on Tucson Shooter Prosecution

Jim Lindgren of the Volokh Conspiracy has some interesting observations on the matter, namely that they are trying to federally pin all victims on Loughner. This adds to what Dave Hardy was saying early after the shooting that prosecuting Loughner federally is a mistake, and that Arizona courts would have been the better venue to get a conviction.

TSA In Hot Water

Apparently Amtrak is none too pleased with a TSA stunt at a Savannah Train Station:

In late February, the Transportation Security Administration took over the Amtrak station in Savannah, Ga., and thoroughly searched every person who entered. None of the passengers got into trouble, but the TSA certainly did â€” big time.

Amtrak Police Chief John Oâ€™Connor said he first thought a blog posting about the incident was a joke. When he discovered that the TSAâ€™s VIPR team did at least some of what the blog said, he was livid. He ordered the VIPR teams off Amtrak property, at least until a firm agreement can be drawn up to prevent the TSA from taking actions that the chief said were illegal and clearly contrary to Amtrak policy.

I would imagine there would be Fourth Amendment implications as well. Imagine if they had done this at, say, Amtrak’s 30th Street Station in Philadelphia. How many armed passengers are proceeding through that station on a daily basis? The status of Amtrak is actually a matter of dispute. In a First Amendment context, they are considered a government actor. But for the purposes of prohibiting firearms, they claim to be a private corporation and are thus can exclude people with firearms from their property, including their stations, as a matter of private property.

It’s probably a good idea if you’re carrying in an Amtrak station to leave if they ask you to. But I really wonder with what statutory authority TSA thought it was operating under. And could you be arrested for carrying a gun through their checkpoint, as you would be at an airport?

UPDATE: Hat tip to Ian Argent for the story.

Vote Nearing in House Judiciary on Castle Doctrine

From Rep. Bryan Cutler. After the knock down drag out fight we’ve waged to get this, this is speeding through the GOP legislature faster than I would have imagined last year. I think we’ll have Castle Doctrine before summer at this rate.

And remember, the Brady’s tried to tell everyone we lost the 2010 elections.

UPDATE from Bitter: And here’s the outcome:

Castle Doctrine passes out of committee with only 1 negative vote

Woo hoo. Now on to the Senate for more action this week.

Self-Defense in Canada

It still exists, even if you use a pistol:

For thousands of Canadians who fully comply with the country’s strict, convoluted firearms regulations, this is a familiar story. Police officers and the Crown routinely deter citizens from taking steps to protect themselves, by forcing them to justify lawful acts of self-defence. Edward Burlew, Mr. Thomson’s lawyer, believes that there is indeed a deliberate, if unstated, desire among Crown prosecutors to send a message that discharging a firearm, even as intruders attempt to burn down your home with you inside it, is not condoned by authorities.

It appears in this instance the Crown dropped charges because they knew they weren’t going to find a jury that would be willing to convict. Even so, the authorities can still make your lives miserable without even taking the case to trial. It would appear they are trying to harass people out of defending themselves, particularly with firearms.

Newark Chief to Chair Gun Control Subcommittee

The gun control subcommittee of the Major Cities Chiefs Police Association, such a powerful and feared group in the gun control movement, that I’ve never even heard of it.Â I find it amusing that the example he offers as to why we need a new ban on assault weapons involves two firearms that were illegally possessed and are absolutely illegal in New Jersey already. If it doesn’t work, it means you have to double down.

40 Dems Could Care Less About Rule of Law

Reports the Hill:

More than 40 House Democrats are calling on President Obama to approve new rules granting federal regulators more authority to crack down on gun trafficking to Mexico.

The request comes at an unfortunate time for the lawmakers, however, as the Department of Justice (DOJ) has just launched a probe into reports that hundreds of guns were lost amid a federal sting designed to track firearms by letting known smugglers buy them with impunity.

Apparently 40 Democratic lawmakers don’t mind the fact that federal law prohibits what the ATF wants to do. They are perfectly fine with the Obama Administration assuming the powers of Congress, and changing the law as he sees fit.