The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State …
Apparently the UK’s Daily Mail yanked a pro-gun rights piece off its page because the ideas therein were deemed too dangerous. As Joe pointed out in a post just now, you can go read the too-dangerous-for-print post over here.
I’m continuously struck by how radical a document our constitution is. Too radical for us to really follow, apparently, and too dangerous for Europeans to even speak of, or debate. This is 200 years after most of them were dead.
It’s no big secret that Dennis Henigan doesn’t like HR822, but it’s amazing how much he thinks pieces of paper stop nut jobs:
Arizona’s gun laws are so nonexistent that Jared Loughner, with his history of mental problems and threatening behavior, was a legal concealed carrier until the moment he pulled the trigger outside that Tucson Safeway. He didn’t even need a permit to carry, though he could easily have obtained one from Arizona authorities. If he had, under H.R. 822 he could have carried his Glock and its 33-round assault clip into Times Square.
Haven’t we had Times Square shootings? I hate to tell you Dennis, but he could have carried his gun to Times Square no matter what the law said, and if his particular form of paranoid schizophrenia had revolved around Times Square, instead of Gabby Giffords, I don’t think words on a piece of parchment, saying he is forbidden from carrying a gun to the scene of his mass murder, were going to stop him. You see, we’re talking about concealed weapons here, Dennis, that means other people can’t see them. Despite what you might believe, police don’t have magic gun seeing powers. Anyone who carries would know that.
I’ll give him the J frame Smith and the modern M&P. I’ll grant the 870 is a pretty decent shotgun for home defense, as are most shotguns. But the Taurus Judge? Really? I’m also not to hot on using N-frame S&W for self-defense unless what you’re defending yourself against is an angry bear. Nonetheless, it’s good to see something like this being discussed somewhere other than blogs and forums.
Over at The Firearm Blog, we see a preview of what is to replace the AK-74. What makes it special? Rails, it looks like. Apparently it’s been made more ergonomic, but it looks like a pretty standard Kalashnikov to me.
I never thought I’d see the day when the Philadelphia Inquirer ran an op-ed from NRA penned by Chris Cox. To say they are outright hostile to NRA’s position is to be mild. I’d like to think that PAFOA’s success in getting one placed might have convinced folks at NRA it was worth a shot. Clearly this has paid off now.
I continue to be befuddled by the number of Pennsylvania news outlets condemning HR822 as a race to the bottom. All it takes to get a concealed carry license in Pennsylvania is paying less than 30 bucks, filling out a form, and waiting a week or so for the background check to clear. If this state doesn’t have reciprocity with another state, it’s because the other state donsn’t want to. Our AG is obligated to probe other states for agreements.
The Post-Gazette summons the specter of “Florida Loophole,” even though that issue is entirely a matter of state law now, and would continue to be entirely a matter of state law if HR822 were to pass.
Sounds like they are surprised such a thing exists at all, but they note:
Evans’ committee meets Dec. 14 with an agenda “to be announced.” He and Murphy tell me of compromise efforts to allow hunting some Sundays on some lands, maybe state game lands.
But Rotz says: “No. We don’t have any compromise position.” And Evans admits: “A lot of our members are very afraid of the Farm Bureau.”
The Farm Bureau pretty obviously doesn’t support hunting. Why isn’t allowing it on public land a reasonable compromise? The Farm Bureau only represents a small fraction of farms in this state, from what I understand. This shouldn’t even really be an issue.
John Richardson has the details on the Supreme Court’s refusal to hear the Msciandaro case. This was in the 4th Circuit Court of appeals, where a guy got arrested for sleeping in his car on National Park property while having a loaded gun in his car, so he challenged the law under the Second Amendment.
If I had to wager, I’m betting (hoping) the Supreme Court is looking for a clean and well constructed carry case.
I think it would be quite difficult to argue now that they are not in “common use.” Indeed, not even the DC Circuit Court of Appeals in Heller II was willing to say they weren’t. They just said even thought they were, they still weren’t protected arms.
Nonetheless, this is more evidence our opponents are losing. AR-15s are now as American as Apple Pie and Wal-Mart.
Looks like Nordyke is about to be reconsidered in the 9th Circuit “En-Banc,” meaning the entire Circuit Court will reconsider the decision, which held that the County of Alameda could ban gun shows on its property if it so wished, and not run afoul of the Second Amendment.