Author: Sebastian

Says Mark Kelly in an interview:

“If we don’t have a Congress that can pass some reasonable gun legislation, which I think the public is asking for, overwhelmingly in some cases, with an expanded background check, if Congress won’t pass that legislation, we’ll find some new members,” Kelly told MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell, according to a transcript provided by the network on Monday.

As if we’re not thinking about the 2014 election cycle as well.

Skokie and North Chicago passed bans, but we’re still winning more than we’re losing. All these bans would be grandfathered under the proposed state preemption law that’s sitting on Quinn’s desk.

The wave continues. I think there are probably a few other states this might be able to happen in the short term. The other side needs to understand that there are consequences for awakening the sleeping giant.

Posting will be a bit scarce this week because of the approaching holiday weekend, and my impending office move that will go along with it. But I do have some news links.

Even after Sandy Hook, Maine’s gun laws remain unchanged.

Manchin is upset that Beretta played their hand very well, and made him look like a chump.

Democracy and distrust.

Canadians can sometimes get guns we can’t. Our importation laws are more strict than Canada’s.

Quite a crowd showed up in Colorado for Magpul’s magazine event. The Daily Caller has more.

A British couple freaks out over ammunition in their garden.

New Jersey appeal over permits to carry has a poor result. This is a state court decision, and New Jersey State courts have long been hostile to civilian firearm ownership.

Government at work with guns.

More Illinois towns are preparing for gun control.

Two of Bloomberg’s pet projects are battling each other over Marco Rubio.

SAF is filing a FOIA request for all information in regards to MAIG’s activity with taxpayer money. This should be interesting, but do think they ought to talk to FloridaCarry, who has already done some work in this area.

Keeping the world safe from bottled water, with guns drawn. Even if it was alcohol, guns drawn? Seriously?

As of midnight last night, it’s become the new Maryland. But unlike Maryland, perhaps Colorado can be turned around. Michael Bane offers this useful advice:

If you must travel through Denver and Boulder, I strongly suggest that ALL magazines of greater than 15 round capacity, including grandfathered magazines, be LOCKED IN A CASE! If stopped by law enforcement in the Denver/Boulder area, under NO CONDITION agree to a search of your car, the car’s trunk or any locked cases in your car or truck. Under NO CONDITION answer any questions about the content of the cases. If the heads of the IRS can take the Fifth in front of Congress, you can certainly do so with the local police. Under NO CONDITION leave a magazine with a capacity of greater than 15 rounds visible in your car or truck, or you’re fair game for a search. Be polite, but be firm…in the absence of probable cause, police can’t go on a fishing expedition in your car unless you let them.

RTWT. It’s a sad state of affairs, but until Colorado is freed, this is the protocol.

With the news cycle having gone totally, fabulously, gay with the demise of DOMA, we’re a bit short on stories about Second Amendment topics. But I’ll give it a good college try:

Gun sales are booming in California, which is considering numerous pieces of anti-gun legislation. The war against semi-automatic long guns are the new ban handgun movement, probably because the Courts have had little to say about it.

The antis respond to the SAFE lawsuit.

Another Mayor quits Bloomberg’s coalition. More here.

Mayor Rahm is proposing a new Assault Weapons Ban for Chicago.

Bloomberg’s credibility suffers an enormous blow.

Mark Kelly and Gabby Giffords tour to revive gun control.

Dueling rallies was the theme at the Georgia State Capitol. I dig the dude in a seersucker with the AR.

Slate is rethinking gun control.

Top NH cop going after Bloomberg. But I thought cops were on their side?

The P-90-like shotgun that never was.

The junk science of gun research.

Apparently Marion Hammer is pushing a bill that would put people who voluntarily submit to mental health treatment to NICS.

The bill, HB 1355, would prohibit the sale of guns to people who voluntarily undergo outpatient mental health treatment after being given an involuntary examination under the Baker Act — but only if certain provisions are met.

The bill passed the state legislature with only one vote against it and now awaits Scott’s signature before it becomes law. It has drawn attention from many, some urging Scott to veto the bill and others urging him to sign it.

“It’s the right thing to do,” Hammer said. “Keeping the guns out of the hands of dangerous people with mental illnesses is what everybody should want to do.”

From what it sounds like, this is roughly akin to pleading guilty in a criminal case. But if involuntary treatment would have been mandated, why not then proceed with the actual adjudication. If they revoke their voluntary status before treatment is completed, why not also go for an actual adjudication. If adjudication is difficult or impossible, I tend to think a better option would be revisiting the procedures.

Before gun ownership is restricted, an examining physician must first have found that the person is a threat to his- or herself or to others. The physician must also verify that if the person had not submitted to voluntary treatment, involuntary treatment would have been mandated.

Additionally, before agreeing to treatment, the person must have received notice that such treatment might restrict future gun ownership. That person must acknowledge receipt of such notice in writing.

Finally, a judge or magistrate must have reviewed the record classifying a person as a danger and ordered that the record be submitted to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.

If those four requirements are met, then gun ownership would be limited.

“(The bill) does not cover people who voluntarily go to private counseling for help,” Hammer said.

I’m guessing involuntary examination under the Baker Act is roughly analogous to a 302 commitment in Pennsylvania, which counts for firearms disability for purposes of Pennsylvania law, but is not (as I understand it) considered to have enough due process for federal purposes. I’m concerned that NRA is pushing a law here that could have very bad consequences people’s Second Amendment rights without sufficient due process, but I am not an expert on how adjudications happen in Florida, or how difficult the process is.

Most firearms attorneys here in Pennsylvania will tell you that it’s routine for people in domestic situations to get taken in on a 302, triggering a sudden prohibition on firearms possession. Montco Firearms Attorney Jonathan Goldstein, who debated Ed Rendell on this topic recently, mentioned that it’s fairly common in domestic arguments. It takes no court, panel, or other kind of adjudication to get a 302, just the cops taking you in involuntarily (which is why if this happen, it’s advised that you go voluntarily). What’s being proposed in Florida would have a number of additional protections not available to Pennsylvanians, but I’m just curious why Marion Hammer is actively pushing this bill. It’s one thing to decide to go neutral on a bill, especially when there needs to be a sacrifice on the altar of “Something must be done!,” and you’ve whittled them down to something fairly innocuous. But quite another to be pushing it. I don’t think rights ought to be denied or disparaged without due process, and I’m very wary of setting a precent that voluntary treatment is grounds for a firearms disability. I think this will come back to bite us.

I tend to agree with much of the sentiment expressed over at the Vuurwapen Blog, in regards to people who are stupidly irresponsible with guns. The problem is, as he points out, that we don’t have a good test for stupid that wouldn’t also discriminate against the rights of others.

I’m not convinced that mandatory training and safety courses will be of much help; even if they’re forced to attend, these people won’t retain much or any of the information that’s passed to them. Someone with the right attitude – of affording firearms the respect they deserve as tools capable of causing harm when misused – will seek out this information without being forced to do so. Novice or expert, it’s the willingness to constantly use firearms in a safe and responsible manner that is important. Yes, perhaps some people just need a little nudge in the right direction. But others will never come around.

I agree. Read the whole thing.