Sebastian – Page 845 – Shall Not Be Questioned

I Will Welcome Rendell’s Departure

Republican or Democrat, at least we won’t have Ed Rendell to kick around anymore after 2010, or maybe that’s the other way around. Go see Capitol Ideas for the Guv’s latest delusions of grandeur. HeÂ thinks we’re lucky to have Obama, and, of course, him. Because he gets this whole green thing. Unless, of course, by green you mean money. If the budget crisis of Ed’s making wasn’t proof enough that Rendell either skipped Econ 101 or slept through it, he also believes we’re not paying enough for milk. Price controls? What could possibly go wrong?

Hat Tip to Grassroots PA for the milk thing.

What’s Wrong With This Picture?

From an AP story on the shooting of four SWAT officers:

A gunman opened fire early Thursday on a SWAT team that burst into a home during a drug and gun raid, wounding four officers while spraying bullets from atop a staircase, authorities said. One officer was critically wounded.

Contrasted with:

He was charged with four counts of attempted murder, as well illegal weapons possession and receiving stolen property. The .357 Magnum used to shoot the officers was reported stolen from South Carolina, Ford said.

Now, I suppose it’s possible they got .357 Magnum confused with .357 SIG, but one wonders how a six shot revolver sprays bullets. I think getting it right is important here, because by reporting it incorrectly, the AP fails to convey just how dangerous this individual was. The story makes it seem like he was just shooting wildly and got lucky.

He shot four police officers, in full body armor, with guns drawn and ready, at night, with a six shot revolver. Â He seriously wounded one with a head shot, wounded another in the foot, and landed two chest shots which were stopped by the officers’ body armor.Â That, folks, is a dangerous individual who has some serious gunfighting skills. Given the kind of crap he was involved in, the officers involved deserve a lot of praise for getting this guy off the streets. He didn’t just land lucky shots spraying wildly. If this guy had confronted non-SWAT officers, he probably would have killed somebody. Â The most seriously wounded officer, the one shot in the head, seems to be doing fine, and is expected to recover, though he may lose an eye due to the path of the bullet.

More Fight in California

With Nordyke’s En Banc hearing happening as we speak, there’s more going on in the Golden State that will have serious consequences. California is essentially on the verge of making it virtually impossible to remain there and still be a competitive shooter, hunter, or other type of enthusiast.

Sitting on the Governator’s desk are two bills, one to outlaw gun shows at cow palace, SB585, and the other to create a detailed regulatory and registration system for ammo that will ban internet sales, AB962. Â See this flyer about telling Schwarzenegger to veto these bills.

Howard Nemerov is reporting that Cabela’s is getting on board pressuring the Governor by saying they will stop selling ammunition in California if this is signed into law. I suspect a lot other ammo vendors will too, as the costs to comply with this are going to be high. Â This isn’t a lost cause, as Schwarzenegger has been willing to veto similar bills in the past, so he might help us out here. But folks need to call.

Apples and Oranges

Paul Helmke, President of the Brady Campaign, notices the Calguns Foundation wants access to information on the type of gun used in a crime that resulted in the death of four police officers in Oakland, and wonders why we can’t all just get along and agree that ATF should be allowed to share trace data. Â Only problem is, ATF doesn’t want to share trace data. Â I would also argue there’s a big difference between wanting to know what kind of gun is used in a specific crime, and wanting access to an entire database of law enforcement sensitive information so that you can read the tea leaves, and postulate.

Calguns is fighting for this information because the shooting is being used as the impetus for even more restrictions on the Second Amendment in California, and the types of weapons used is a key component to the political fight. I wouldn’t blame the Brady’s, if the situation were reversed, from trying to get a hold of relevant information. I might still oppose it just because they are the opposition, but they would at least have a point if they called foul on us trying to stop it after we did the same thing. But I don’t think it’s a good analogy to trace data. That’s an animal of a different stripe.

Gun Rights Advancing in Delaware

New Castle County is considering a Katrina bill, and it goes to show how it doesn’t take much to make a change to government at the local level:

Tansey is not a gun owner himself, but says he was approached by Brandt Farley, a constituent active in the National Rifle Association who pointed out what he believes are shortcomings in the county code.

Farley, who also owns First State Firearms, said language that gives the county executive the right to place “limitations upon the carrying or stockpiling of firearms, weapons or ammunition” is out of step with state and federal statutes.

“Delaware state law prevents other municipalities from passing patchwork gun laws,”Â Farley said.

“The concern is that what happened during [Hurricane] Katrina in New Orleans, where Louisiana passed a law that prohibited the accumulation of guns, doesn’t happen here,” Tansey said.

One guy, and they are looking to change the law. I hope we see more of this, particularly with the Bloomberg mayors.

Scranton Looks to Challenge State Preemption Laws

It looks like the Scranton City Council wants to hop on board with the effort to end Pennsylvania’s preemption on local gun laws with a lost and stolen requirement. What’s different about this case is that it would be the first city with a mayor who is not in Bloomberg’s anti-gun coalition to pass this illegal law. Of the nine cities that have passed it and the one that passed a resolution in support of it, all have mayors who are supporters of Mike Bloomberg’s initiatives.

With the mayor of Scranton running for Governor, this may not be the kind of attention he wants for the town. It would be wise for gun owners in the city to get him on their side, as well as call all of the Council members listed in the ILA alert.

Colosimo’s Closing Up Shop

His attorney says he’s going to close. ATF is planning to revoke his FFL, and he does not plan to contest it. He’s still apparently debating whether he’s going to fight the criminal charge against his corporation.

Federal authorities began investigating Colosimo’s after the protests, and the ATF since has filed a notice to revoke his federal license to sell firearms, said Colosimo’s attorney, Joe Canuso.

So ATF didn’t inspect this guy until after the protests? That must be how he kept the FFL for so long. If ATF is doing a retrospective paperwork inspection, how are they determining that the sale was to a straw buyer, and that it was willful? It would be one thing if they conducted a sting, but if ATF is just now looking through his paperwork, how is intent being determined? Is it similar to ATFs traditional approach, which is if it was an error in paperwork, it clearly had to have been willful? How often does ATF find paperwork problems at other FFLs it inspects that don’t end up facing charges? These aren’t just semantics. The section of the United States Code the corporation is charged under is Title 18, Chapter 44, 922(m):

It shall be unlawful for any licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector knowingly to make any false entry in, to fail to make appropriate entry in, or to fail to properly maintain, any record which he is required to keep pursuant to sectionÂ 923 of this chapter or regulations promulgated thereunder.

The statute requires intention to violate, so the United States would need to have evidence that that there was intent to commit a violation. What’s the evidence of that? These are questions that deserve an answer, but we will never find out of Mr. Colosimo doesn’t contest the charges against his company. If the charges are true, fine, plead guilty, by all means. But if they are false, the federal government should be forced to meet its burden before a judge and jury.

Prosecution by Information

The US Attorneys have released the information associated with the prosecution of Colosimo’s gun shop. Â They have also issued a press release as well. What strikes me is the complaint against them doesn’t really offer any evidence that his paperwork was a willful violation, it just states that is the case. Paperwork errors are not that uncommon in a high volume gun business. Few FFLs can get everything right 100% of the time. The question still remains why ATF allowed him to keep operating all these years if he was engaging in willful violations of the condition of his license. When was the last time ATF inspected the records of Colosimos? Â What violations were found? These are key questions in this case, that I think the public ought to know.

But the fact is, if this is a deal where Colosimo’s Inc. is going to plead guilty, the District Attorney doesn’t need to bring forth detailed evidence, since the defendant will admit he is guilty . He will not force the state to meet its burden, and so it won’t bother.

I can’t say I would entirely blame James Colosimo, at age 77, if he agreed to plead guilty rather than risk financial and personal ruin trying to fight charges in front of a jury. But it should be understood that by admitting to such actions, he will not get to enter retirement with his dignity, and in the right. He will have admitted his shop was engaged in criminal activity, and that’s not something I’m going to support. Everything the anti-gun folks have said about Colosimo’s will have be admitted to as true. Whether that’s just a matter of legal fact, rather than actual fact, I don’t think is important. Colosimos will be a criminal gun shop, and that’s how it will be remembered. James Colosimo might get to retire in peace, but that will be little comfort for the next gun shop that ends up in the crosshairs.

This is one of those businesses, when you get too tired to cross every ‘t’ and dot every ‘i’, and even more importantly, when you lose interest in standing up for what’s right, it’s time to give up the FFL, close up shop, and get out of the business.

It’s Hard to Take This Kind of Thinking Seriously

Our token anti-gunner makes a classic cognitive error when it comes to politics:

Why do you think there are such great differences between Republicans and Democrats. My own idea, very unscientific and totally without proof, is that among the Republicans you’ve got the mindless close-minded masses who cannot think outside their pre-conceived notions of how things should be. These are the millions who listen to Beck and Limbaugh and O’reilly for their inspiration. Among the Democrats, on the other hand, you’ve got the open-minded, the seekers, the idealists, folks who are generally better educated and better able to distinguish right from wrong.

Either that, or people who are into hunting, shooting, or who have a gun for self-defense, very strongly value that right and identify more with the party who has a stronger reputation for defending it. It’s always tempting to think of the other side as marching lemmings, and your side as enlightened thinking individuals, but down that rabbit hole lies madness. There’s plenty of political ignorance on both sides of the spectrum, and plenty of places you can find echo chambers, and opportunists telling people what they want to hear. It might not take the same form on both sides of the aisle, but any serious engagement in political discourse reveals MikeB’s assertion to be nonsense.

Author: Sebastian