Fitzpatrick & Meehan Working With Enemies of Second Amendment

Mike Fitzpatrick and Pat Meehan have shown a willingness to play both sides of the gun control debate, and it’s no surprise they are co-sponsoring a gun control bill that tries to make gun trafficking double plus illegal. There’s no middle ground with this issue anymore, especially when the Democrats they are joining with are liars, and the worst that party has to offer in terms of people who would like to burn the Second Amendment. Take a look what Rep. Elijah Cummings has to say about the bill:

 

The current penalties for straw purchasers are “toothless” and merely serve as a “slap on the wrist,” critics say. They argue there is little incentive to prevent people from making straw purchases, or for law enforcement to arrest them.

“It’s like going 65 miles an hour in a 55 zone and getting a speeding ticket,” Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) told The Hill. “There’s no real punishment.”

In what way is a 10 year federal felony conviction “no real punishment.” You can rob a bank and do less time. Elijah Cummings is flat our lying. Constituents of Pat Meehan should write him and ask him why he’s joining with liars are frauds. Fitzpatrick is not running again, so I could care less of about him. He’s always been a worm. Good riddance.

Meehan has some pretty rural parts in his district. There’s certainly a few gun clubs. He has no reason to keep working with the enemies of the Second Amendment, other than his constituents are not applying enough pressure to keep him in the pro-gun fold. That district isn’t going to support a wild-eyed conservative firebrand, but it should support a candidate pretty solid on Second Amendment issues. Meehan’s district is even on the Cook PVI scale. You don’t see Ryan Costello next door in six, which is only R+1 on Cooke PVI equivocating on the issue.

Suburban Philadelphia gun owners need to get more active. This is the only part of the country outside of New York where you’re getting Republicans who are soft on this issue.

Toomey Backs off Gun Control

This just might lead you to believe that an election is coming up, because there were plans for a gun rights group to protest Pat Toomey’s office, but they were cancelled when apparently, “a Toomey staffer promised the senator would not reintroduce the high-profile gun control bill known as the Toomey-Manchin proposal that stalled in the Senate two years ago.” The article notes Democrats are exploiting this weakness:

A spokesman for Democratic Senate candidate Katie McGinty […] accused Toomey of telling gun-control advocates one thing and gun rights advocates another and said he is “playing politics with the issue of gun safety instead of being honest with the people of Pennsylvania.”

The truth hurts, don’t it Pat? She’s got your number. My impression that Toomey still has a pretty good chance of winning the election. Pennsylvania likes dull, bland politicians, and he fits that role like a glove. We will almost certainly be able to get a number of pro-gun votes out of him if he stays in office that we would not from any potential Democratic challenger. Personally, I’d rather have Casey and Manchin’s seats than Toomey’s, even though I’m still angry at his concessions on this issue.

Polling Shows Very Bad News for Gun Control

I used to be accepted in the Democratic Party that gun control cost them Congress in 1994, and cost Al Gore the election in 2000. Them somehow, Obama and the media convinced candidates it was cool again. Our opponents are saying this poll shows growing interest in gun policy, but a closer look at the crosstabs show this is actually very bad news for them. That’s probably why Martin O’Malley thought it was a good idea to introduce a gun control plan that makes Al Gore’s look mild. Let me briefly summarize what Obama’s Chosen One to take out Hillary proposes:

  • Universal gun registration.
  • Licensing and fingerprinting of gun owners.
  • Ban on so-called “assault weapons” like he did in Maryland.
  • Ban possession of any firearm by people under 21. No more teaching your kids.
  • Reject federally mandated concealed carry.
  • Require microstamping federally.
  • Extend domestic situations to people dating.
  • Mandated “lost & stolen” reporting.
  • Allow unlimited surprise inspection of dealers.
  • Revoke the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.
  • Make people subject to TROs prohibited persons.
  • Require guns in the home be locked up and made unavailable for self-defense. Remember, the Supreme Court is retreating from Heller and McDonald.
  • Force manufacturers who do business with the federal government to install “safety features” like magazine disconnects.

This isn’t much of a sage prediction, but O’Malley is not even going to give Hillary a run for her money. He’s a loser, as Donald Trump would say. Stick a fork in him, he’s done. He’ll be a glaring example that gun control won’t save you, even in a Democratic Primary.

Well, That Didn’t Amount to Much

Everytown Rally Capitol Hill

Everytown’s rally on Capitol Hill, that they said would be “massive” turned out to be no bigger than a typical Friends of the NRA dinner. The Philadelphia FNRA dinner turns out twice the number of people as are in that crowd every year:

In an email promoting the event last week Everytown for Gun Safety had promised to “flood the Capitol grounds with gun sense supporters,” and said the protest would be “massive.” Everytown did not provide an estimate on crowd size in their press release summarizing the event.

If you’re going to beat your chest like this, you better be damned sure to deliver something extraordinary if you plan to scare politicians. Bloomberg’s rally is in the realm of “things politicians are used to seeing on Capitol Hill. This is not. Donna Dees’ does not need to worry. She is still the reigning queen of gun control rallies. At least Bloomberg didn’t have to blow a ton of money on busses and box lunches.

Everytown has not been completely without effect, however. Gun sales are smashing records. See? They are having an impact.

Brewing in the Mid 19th Century

Gun news is pretty slow this week, and what news there is I’ll do in the weekly gun news later today. So today I will talk about my other hobby, namely home brewing. I make a batch of beer about every month, and always try to keep something on both of my taps. These days I rarely buy beer on the open market, and I’ve done enough brewing that some of my home brews can compare to some commercial offerings on the craft market (so I’m told). My next step is probably competition brewing, and seeing how my brews measure up. Not long ago I did a post about finding some mid-19th century squat bottles my 4x great-grandfather made. Since then, I’ve been doing research into 19th century brewing, to learn what ingredients might have gone into the “Brown Stout” that appeared on some of his bottles.

The best reference I found for 19th century brewing is in this book, written in the 1850s, “The Complete Practical Brewer.” The first thing that struck me is how much they actually knew about the science behind brewing, in the age before anyone fully understood the microorganisms at work in the process. Brewing in the 19th century is virtually no different than it is today, except for equipment. I found this passage on yeast from the book interesting, because it’s pretty clear they knew little about it:

Yeast is a frothy substance, of a brownish-gray colour and bitter taste, which is formed on the surface of ale or wine while fermenting. If it be put into sacks, the moisture gradually drops out, and the yeast remains be hind in a solid form. It has very much of the flavour and taste of cheese when in this state; but its colour is still darker. This dried yeast promotes or excites fermentation, but it does not answer quite so well as fresh yeast. From the resemblance which dried yeast has to cheese, we would be naturally inclined to infer that it is a species or variety of gluten. But if we attempt to induce fermentation in wort by adding the gluten of wheat, we will be unsuccessful.

After yeast is kept for some time in a cylindrical glass vessel, a white substance, not unlike curd, separates and swims on the surface. If this substance be removed, the yeast loses the property of exciting fermentation. This white substance possesses many of the properties of gluten, or vegetable fibrin, though it differs from it in others. Its colour is much whiter; it has not the same elasticity, and its particles do not adhere with the same force. In short, it agrees much more nearly, in its properties, with curd of milk, than with gluten of wheat.

Yeah, because when you skimmed the substance off the surface, you were actually skimming off the yeast colony. But they couldn’t have known that. Louis Pasteur wouldn’t publish “Physiological Theory of Fermentation” until 1879, nearly three decades after this book was written. But despite the lack of microbiology knowledge among brewers at the time, the book was a treasure trove, and helped me formulate a recipe. Brown Stouts were essentially strong porters (8-10% ABV), made with brown malt. During the French Revolution, supplies of brown malt were disrupted, so brewers switched to pale malts, and used adjuncts to try to reproduce that porter flavor. Various tricks were developed, including darkening sugar in an iron vessel, and then pounding it apart and throwing it in the boil. In the process of switching to pale malts, brewers of the time discovered pale malts were much more efficient than brown. After the introduction of “Black Patent” malt in 1817, brown malt was doomed, but it still was used through most of the 19th century. In the mid 1800s it was common to use one part brown malt to two parts pale malt, so that’s what I went with.

Licorice root was commonly used in the boil, so I used a little star anise. Instead of scorched sugar, I used Belgian dark Candi Sugar. I added some Carafoam to help with body. Brown Stouts were ridiculously hoppy. I was afraid to go quite as far as they would have. At the time, brewers were still using a lot of imported British hops, so I used 3oz of American Cluster hops as the bittering hops, 1oz Brewer’s Gold at 30 mins, and finished with 1oz British Kent Goldings.

If you were ever try to reproduce an ale like this, be warned that while I was prepared for Brown Malt to be less efficient than pale, it was really less efficient. I used 10lb. of Maris Otter and 5lb. of Thomas Fawcett Brown Malt, thinking that would be plenty to get me to my goal. If I had to do it over again, I would use 12lb. of Maris Otter and 6lb. of Thomas Fawcett. That is a “Yuge” ale, to channel The Donald. I had to make up the shortfall by using the whole pound of Candi Sugar, and throwing in 3/4lb. of dry malt extract (DME) into the boil.

From the book, it looks like mid-19th century brewers didn’t pitch very much yeast into their worts. This would affect the flavors the yeast will give off. Some of these would be considered off flavors today. I was reluctant to do this, so I did a full pitch of an American Ale yeast with a starter. I did allow the fermenter to rise to about 72 degrees to give it a bit more of the flavor it probably would have had at the time.

The end result is still fermenting, but I’m hoping it turns out.

Upper Darby Top Cop Wasting Money on Anti-Gun Crusade

UPDATE: Link fixed.

Upper Darby top cop Michael Chitwood likes theatrics, but isn’t a big fan of civilians owning guns. The Upper Darby Police Department is cleaning out its evidence room of guns, but rather than transferring them to an FFL to sell them to law-abiding citizens, he’s sending them all to the incinerator. Who knows what kind of historic pieces could be in there. This statement pretty much says it all:

“Our way of addressing the gun issue in America is to destroy them all,” said Michael Chitwood, township police superintendent.

That, friends, isn’t someone who is pro-gun control. Superintendent Chitwood is anti-gun. If there are any readers here from Upper Darby, I would organize a group of gun owners to flood the next Township Supervisor meeting and demand Chitwood be dismissed. Keep the pressure on. A lot of these local government bodies will fold like a cheap deck of cards even at minor pressure from constituents. At the very least you might be able to convince the Board to make him back off all the gun control crap. This isn’t Chicago or New York, and I’m certain there are still a fair number of gun owners in Delaware County. That message should be sent loud enough and clear enough that Chitwood and the Township Supervisors would rather oil the squeaky wheel than ignore it.

Bradys Get Out There for National Suicide Prevention Week

The Brady Center is back out with one of the more ridiculous arguments I’ve ever heard for gun control, probably in the hopes that it might bring in some much needed cash:

“A Gun in the home makes a suicide three times more likely.”

There are some areas where statistical analysis is useful, but this is not one of those cases. This would be like arguing that having a gun in the home makes it three times more likely you’ll rob a bank. Or perhaps having a bottle of liquor in the home makes it three times more likely that you’ll die from cirrhosis of the liver. Could be high-speed internet links make it 3x more likely you’ll download kiddie porn. All these things may statistically be true, but they are meaningless when applied to individuals.

I am not and have never been suicidal. If you’re not a bank robber, you’re not going to suddenly decide to rob a bank just because there’s a gun around. If you’re not an alcoholic, that statistic is meaningless to you, regardless of the presence of alcohol in your home. You get the picture.

I would say if you have a tendency to be suicidal, you have a loved one with a tendency toward suicidal behavior, or is just generally troubled, you’ll want to take precautions if you own guns. Perhaps gun ownership itself isn’t a wise thing for you in some circumstances. I have no disagreement with that notion.

But for most of us that isn’t the case, and it’s ridiculous, and frankly more than a bit insulting, to suggest otherwise. I am not suicidal. For me that is a meaningless statistic, and it is for most of you too. I’d be willing to bet if you looked up the statistics, and applied some Brady logic, walking across the Golden Gate bridge increases your risk of suicide by an even greater amount!

Northampton County Club in Trouble

Local news outlets are reporting a gun club near Easton, Pennsylvania, is being investigated by the State Police to see if there is any merit to residents accusations that gunfire from the club is hitting their homes.

I haven’t been to the club, so I don’t really know what kind of backstops or baffling they have. From a Google Eyes view, it certainly looks like it’s possible rounds could be impacting residences.

Clubs get a lot of things like this blamed on them even when it’s not coming from the club directly. In some cases I’ve seen, the person hurling accusations at a club are not even downrange, or in one case was in the ballistic shadow of a mountain that stood between the club and the residence.

Hopefully if it does turn out the bullets are coming from the range, they have the resources to correct the problem. A lot of clubs live hand to mouth, and a determination that a range in unsafe can be enough to shut a club down for good.

I’d note that area has seen a lot of in-migration from New Jersey and New York, and there’s a contingent of residents that commute to New York City from that area, so you’ll have plenty of people in the area who don’t want to coexist with a gun club.

Bloomberg Planning Capitol Hill Protest Thursday

Bloomberg is planning a protest on September 10th at Capitol Hill. If any of my readers who live in the area want to go grab a decent wide-angle picture, we’ll see what kind of turnout they can generate with all this new gun control energy the media keeps saying is welling up from the grassroots.

Donna Dees, the person behind the Million Mom March, writes an article over at The Daily Beast about how to organize a march: “Got $3 million? That’s what my march cost in 2000. The bigger the march, the more expensive the march.” Dees seems to believe that with the addition of Social Media, she could have produced a much bigger march than the Million Mom March on Mother Day 2000. I think she discounts that the dynamic of this issue has changed quite fundamentally since 2000. We have more women involved in the shooting sports and armed self-protection than any other time in recent memory. There are other voices, female  voices, out there who will oppose you vigorously. It won’t be as easy this time. Dees article reads like a bit of chest beating to me, almost challenging Bloomberg to do better than she could, knowing he probably won’t.

But Bloomberg certainly has the cash to organize a march on this scale, and you can drive turnout if you’re willing to pay for busses and boxed lunches. Despite the fact that most gun control groups are not doing well, Bloomberg brings more money to the table than the gun control movement has ever had at its disposal. Dees seems to believe, “America is at a rare tipping point now.” I guess Bloomberg’s rally on Capitol Hill will give us an idea of whether or not that’s true.

How to Turn Six into Dozens

In last week’s news link we covered a tweet from CSGV of a protest outside the office of Virginia State Senator John Edwards:

It would seem the local CBS affiliate in southwest Virginia has turned that fantastic crowd of people into “dozens” of protestors. To be fair, it looks like there were one or two more people than are showing in CSGV’s picture, but that doesn’t raise the number to even a dozen, let alone “dozens.” That implies a crowd of at least 24, and more realistically 36. You don’t have 24 people at that protest. The gun control movement would have died years ago if they didn’t have the media willfully helping them drive their preferred narratives.