search
top

BOHICA

The media will run this up and down and sideways, unless it interferes with a narrative, in which case it will quickly disappear. Their coverage, their endless obsession with the shooter, will plant the seed in the brain of the next unhinged loser, and the cycle will continue. I’m sure, as we speak, the media are looking for narratives: did he buy the gun at a gun show in Arizona? God help us if he did. California has all the gun laws the antis could dream of, but that will go unmentioned. There will always be a pretext for needing more of the cake.

This is Officially the Dumbest Things I’ve Read in a While

Look out, The Inquirer is op-eding! Seriously, this displays so much ignorance about guns and ammunition, it’s astounding. This is the kind of stuff I’d expect children to come up with. But this was vomited onto paper by an adult and put up as an op-ed by presumably adult editors:

Today, one can walk into a gun shop and purchase, for instance, a .22, .38, or .44-caliber handgun. Most firearms are built to accommodate one size round only. So here’s what would happen if the manufacture of today’s standard-size rounds were outlawed, and .23, .39 and .46-caliber rounds took their place: Eventually, gun owners would run out of the old ammo, and their weapons would become paperweights.

Oh my God. Seriously? I don’t even know where to begin. But I’ll hit a few points:

For most firearms, this would be a barrel change, and that’s about it. Criminals will have no trouble obtaining new barrels for old guns.

Ammunition can be manufactured in basements. At this point the only parts I order out for are primers and powder. I know someone who casts and polycoats bullets in his basement, with a machine that makes thousands at a time. This very very stupid proposal by a very very ignorant person isn’t going to change that. I have enough brass to keep shooting for a decade or more. And for new brass? Presumably the police and military aren’t going to be made to retool, so there will still be plenty, and you can’t regulate it. It would be more pointless than regulating pot, which at least smells bad.

Lastly, does it matter if someone gets shot with a .22 or a .23? Seriously. Grow up. Even after this law is passed, what have you accomplished? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. Mexico has restrictions on ammunition similar to what this guy proposes, and Mexican cartels have no trouble obtaining restricted firearms and restricted ammunition, and a .38 Super will kill just as readily as a 9mm.

Huge Hole Blown in PLCAA

The Supreme Court has denied cert in the Remington case. At issue is whether Remington violated Connecticut’s Unfair Trade Practices Act. From the Connecticut Supreme Court ruling that was on appeal to SCOTUS:

Specifically, if the defendants did indeed seek to expand the market for their assault weapons through advertising campaigns that encouraged consumers to use the weapons not for legal purposes such as self-defense, hunting, collecting, or target practice, but to launch offensive assaults against their perceived enemies, then we are aware of nothing in the text or legislative history of PLCAA to indicate that Congress intended to shield the defendants from liability for the tragedy that resulted.

The end result will likely be that states pass laws that eliminate or frustrate the firearms manufacturers ability to market. Much like happened with tobacco. Clearly now there’s significant legal hazard in marketing firearms.

UPDATE: Dave Hardy, who actually practices appellate law, has a take on this as well. He seems to suggest the plaintiffs still have quite an uphill climb. But discovery will now proceed.

Good Read

This is rather long, but worth the read. The summary:

The historian of American statecraft and spycraft and conservative political philosopher Angelo Codevilla talks about the ruling elite, Jonathan Pollard, and the rise of the techno-surveillance state—and the consequent demise of the American Empire

Demographic Talk

Cam Edwards asks:

Gun control groups massively outspent Second Amendment organizations in the Virginia elections that brought Democrats control of the state legislature, dropping at least $2.5 million into more than a dozen races in suburban swing districts. Yet we hear all the time about the NRA’s spending, and how politicians who support the Second Amendment are really just “in the pocket of the gun lobby.” Why shouldn’t the same be said of politicians who rake in even more cash from anti-gun groups?

Because it’s OK when they do it. I’ve said before, they aren’t against money in politics. They are against your money in politics. The issue for Bloomberg was that in his early efforts, it became apparent Virginia would only be bought at a higher cost. All Bloomberg had to do was boost spending and wait for the demographics of Northern Virginia to tip the state.

What demographics, you might add? For 40% of people in Fairfax County, English is not their first language. It has been flooded by new immigrants. Most of those immigrants are going to be working in service jobs for federal workers and government contractors who are the main source of income for the areas. Other than the defense industry, those demos aren’t exactly rich farming grounds for Republicans. And the Dems have historically owned immigrant communities. These aren’t favorable demographics for gun rights. Sorry, but that’s just the truth.

The bluing of the Philadelphia suburbs is another beast. One factor is the ring counties are also dealing with out-migration from cities where Dems routinely get 80% of the vote or more. The other is the shifting political coalition plays against the GOP here.

Blue collar workers are traditionally the democratic voters in the ring counties. Educated upper middle class households used to form the GOP’s core base around here, and that has shifted to being the core Dem base. That trend started with Bill Clinton. While the blue collar vote is changing, it’s not changing fast enough to offset losses. Upper middle class voters are leaving the GOP faster than blue collar workers are coming over to it. The GOP leadership that have held power here, really since the Civil War, have also not adapted well; they are still partying like it’s 1985 and running candidates that appeal to their old base. Fitzpatrick held on because the Dems ran an awful candidate against him. That luck likely won’t hold.

“But Western PA has almost all gone red!” That’s great, but Western PA is also depopulating. Pennsylvania’s demographics haven’t changed even a fraction of what Virginia’s has. But gun owners are going to have to get their acts together to fight off what’s coming, because the fact is when elites decide they prefer a certain policy, say, gun control, they will usually get their way eventually. I don’t for a minute believe gun rights is a lost cause, but we can’t keep doing what we’ve been doing and expect to keep winning.

Why Would Young People Join?

The Trace is reporting a startling statistic about people who are donating to NRA-PVF. NRA is lead by a septuagenarian (Wayne turns 70 today! Happy Birthday Wayne! My dad is 70 too, but unlike you, he retired 8 years ago) who hasn’t done a damned thing to appeal to younger shooters. “OK Boomer” is a meme absolutely made for the NRA under Wayne.

NRA needs to update its image. Really, they needed to do it a decade ago. Time is running out. I suspect NRA is facing the same demographic cliff my club is looking at in a decade, and for the same reason: nothing was done to cater to younger shooters for years. The Angry Dana Strategy was a waste of time. They would have done better to flush all that money down the toilet. Anger does not appeal to younger people. Anger appeals to old farts with nothing better to do than get themselves worked up on social media.

For years NRA has not at all played to their strengths. They trashed their own training programs for the Carry Guard debacle. They’ve deemphasized outreach to shooting communities and don’t focus on growing them. That should be NRA’s bread and butter. Political power will follow from that. But instead we’re bleeding NRA dry to cover for Wayne’s past sins.

For one fool or another …

… please vote. Especially if you’re in Virginia.

Targeting Judges for Following the Law

The Mayor of Pittsburgh and Allegheny County Chief Executive targeting a judge for following the law is despicable, and I hope gun voters will have Judge Joseph James’ back come election time. It’s a consequence of having elected judges in Pennsylvania. If Judge James had ruled the other way, we certainly would have done the same. But in this case, the law is unambiguously on our side. Do you remember the judge that threw out the preemption enhancement because it was unconstitutionally attached to a metal theft bill? I don’t. Because the law was plausibly not on our side. The judge had to make a call that’s within the space of the law. In this case, they are looking to throw their weight around and intimidate the judiciary into using political expedience rather than the law to inform their decision making.

To me, this looks like a couple of petty tyrants upset they didn’t get their way.

top