California Assemblyman Anthony Portantino has introduced a bill to ban the open carry of rifles, as well as handguns. The courts are the only thing that will save gun rights in California now. It’s pretty clear the legislature there has carte blanche to enact whatever restrictions they desire.
Month: January 2012
Banning Perfume
SayUncle notes that New Hampshire is considering a ban on perfume for public workers, using some of the same logic that proponents of smoking bans were proffering. Everyone’s ran into women who smell like they bathe in perfume, and certainly there are men who seem to shower in Aqua Velva. But it seems to me that people aren’t willing to surrender much personal discomfort for the sake of freedom. Bitter is asthmatic, and perfume is a trigger for her, but her philosophy is not to make her problem everyone else’s; there are discomforts that must be tolerated in respecting the freedom and autonomy of others. This form of extreme selfishness is the same mentality that is getting peanut butter and jelly banned from elementary schools. I’d also note that this form of selfishness is highly prevalent among our opponents as well.
Gun Sales Surging Internationally?
Dave Hardy notes record gun sales, which we certainly have been hearing a lot about, but it also looks like it’s happening in Australia too:
Equally interesting, it may be a global phenomenon. In Australia, New South Wales to be specific, gun control advocates are upset because gun permits are up about 25%, and uo about 80% over five years ago. It’s also interesting that they have formed a “Shooters Party” in Parliament.
They’ve formed a shooter’s party, largely because they have to. The increased level of sales is making the gun control crowd (Rebecca Peters) in Australia stand up and loudly proclaim that something must be done. They are proposing that people be limited as to how many guns they may acquire.
In some ways I find the foreign gun control organizations refreshingly honest. They don’t like guns, and want to restrict them as much as they can. They make that abundantly clear. You don’t see these people playing up victimhood, and trying to convince everyone they are just out to honor victims, in an attempt to appear sympathetic. The foreign organizations know what they are out to do, and many have the power to do it. When you look at the contrast, you kind of wonder how much our gun control crowd is just mulling about feeling sorry for themselves these days. Not that I can blame them.
Real Preemption Getting a Hearing in Pennsylvania
NRA is alerting members on two bills proceeding in Pennsylvania. One is a bill to give some teeth to our preemption provision, HB1523, sponsored by Daryl Metcalfe. This bill does not go nearly as far as the Florida law, but at least puts the municipality on the hook for legal fees and damages.
The other bill, HB 1668, offers some reforms to transportation of firearms (which are basically handguns, SBRs, and SBSs under PA law). Our transport laws are technically as strict as New Jersey, in that you have to go directly to/from allowed locations for transporting. The only difference is that Pennsylvania licenses are much easier to get, which exempts you from all the silliness. This would allow anyone who isn’t prohibited from firearms possession, or transporting for an unlawful purpose, is permitted to transport a firearm. End of story.
I should note that CeaseFirePA is opposing even this common sense measure:
Tomorrow, the House Judiciary Committee plans to consider legislation that threatens financial penalties for towns that have taken local action in favor of lost or stolen handgun reporting – a reform which police say could help to crack down on illegal gun traffickers and straw purchasers.
If this were true, there would be prosecutions to point to. They would be able to point to instances where this law has been used to punish… well… anybody. For such a necessary law, it doesn’t seem to be very useful. I’m surprised they can still say this with a straight face. NRA is asking folks to contact their state reps:
Please call AND e-mail your state Representative TODAY and urge him or her to support both critical pieces of legislation.
To find contact information or help identifying your state Representative, please click here.
SHOT 2012, A Record Event
After four days, miles of walking, countless face-to-face meetings and more of our industry’s products in one place than anywhere on earth, the 2012 SHOT Show is in the books — and it’s officially a record-breaker.
But, you know, fewer people are choosing to own guns, and the industry is really in decline. Just ask our opponents.
Starbucks Appreciation Day
We have an announcement from the National Gun Control Victims Action Council, an umbrella group for the usual suspects, that they are going to boycott Starbucks on Valentine’s Day 2012, which is February 14th. I am going to declare February 14th Starbucks Appreciation Day, by encouraging gun owners to head to Starbucks to buy some of their fine coffee and pastry products. Bitter and I will certainly participate. I encourage everyone to follow through to the link to the official event to take a look at what they are encouraging folks to do, and do the same, only with a pro-gun or gun-neutral message. You can e-mail Starbucks here. and tell them you appreciate them not taking a position on this issue, and following state laws, and that you appreciate their products. Don’t use the gun control organization’s form, even though you can change the message. They will likely use that to present to Starbucks corporate and spin your name on the list as a supporter of Starbucks banning guns.
I can promise you we can more than offset whatever paltry decrease in sales the anti-gun people will cause. Nontheless, our opponents have once again brought this deceased equine out for a flogging, so we have to once again show Starbucks there are a lot more of us then there are of them.
Grave Bodily Injury or Harm
Thirdpower has a picture of the Vietnam Veteran who was beat within an inch of his life in Philly (Warning, the picture is graphic). The question for those in the City is whether you want to end up like this, or end up flushing your life savings down the toilet fighting the attempted murder charge that’s sure to come from City prosecutors if you use deadly force on a gang of feral teenagers. I should also note some recent news that Gerald Ung is now facing a civil suit from his attacker. Castle Doctrine should prevent this, but since this attack happened before that law went into effect, I’m not sure that can be grounds for dismissing the suit. Ung’s attacker is also suing some of the bars that served them alcohol, including Eulogy Belgian Tavern, one of my favorite haunts in the City.
The real solution is to avoid Philadelphia. You get your life ruined either way; the only question is whether or not you want to walk away with all your brain cells intact, and without the need to seek major surgery. Unfortunately, we live in a society where no one is responsible for their own actions anymore, and we can hardly tolerate consequences for thuggish behavior if it involves good people defending themselves.
UPDATE: From the article at “Above the Law”:
Good luck getting punitive damages — or any damages at all, for that matter — out of Gerald Ung. As noted above by one of our sources, Ung is presumably judgment proof. His criminal defense lawyer at trial, renowned defense attorney Jack McMahon, won a nice acquittal for him — but it probably cost Ung a pretty penny. As we wrote at the time of the acquittal, “the services of Jack McMahon don’t come cheap. The Ungs easily owe McMahon six figures.â€
Ung’s prize for his successful self-defense will be debt up to his eyeballs to Jack McMahon for, quite likely, the rest of his life. I do hope Ung is good at law and becomes a successful attorney. He may have a chance at paying off his debt quickly. For some poor Joe Sixpack who drives a truck for a living, what do you think his options are?
So Gingrich is the New Anti-Mitt
Instapundit has a pretty good round-up of the South Carolina primary. I’ve always liked Newt Gingrich the professor, but I’ve never much liked Newt Gingrich the politician. I noted before about Newt that the 1990s called, and they want their candidate back. He is a more viable alternative, in my opinion, to Rick Santorum, but I still worry that he can’t beat Obama.
I think it was probably fine for Mitt to lose South Carolina. What was not fine for Mitt is to get creamed in South Carolina, which is what happened. If Mitt doesn’t take Florida, he’s going to be in serious trouble as the front runner. He will have lost momentum, and money and support will start flowing to his opponents. If he experiences a long enough losing streak, he can start counting on a brain drain for his campaign, as the rats start to jump off the sinking ship.
On the Second Amendment, the decisive advantage to Gingrich is that he will likely pick much more reliable judges on that issue than Mitt will, though I certainly don’t think Gingrich would be a guarantee. There are plenty of conservative judges out there who don’t like the Second Amendment any more than many left-wing judges. But I give the edge to Gingrich on that count. Gingrich’s record legislatively is not bad, as he delivered on getting an Assault Weapons Ban repeal through the House in 1996, only to have it killed by Bob Dole in the Senate. My big concern about Gingrich is that if he’s the nominee, Obama gets another term.
Investing in Guns
NRA Loses Again in District Court in Texas Case
NRA had already lost on the challenge of the Federal ban on 19-20 year olds purchasing handguns, now they’ve also lost on the challenge to the Texas law that denies permits to 19-20 year olds. Looks like it went before the same judge, so not too surprising it’s the same result. I think the challenge to the purchase restriction is in principle a good idea. I don’t agree with running a carry-based case at the same time. Let the Supreme Court and circuit courts decide on carry independently, and let them decide on the purchase prohibition for 18-20 year olds. Then take the two concepts and tie them together for a challenge to carry. Once Judge Cummings had ruled on the 18-20 year olds for purchase, carry was fore drawn conclusion. I don’t see what strategic sense it made for NRA to fund these in parallel.