Category: Gun Rights

… working so well. See also here.

SAF and Alan Gura are going after Maryland now, for their arbitrary permit issuance. Maryland is in the 4th Circuit, along with Virginia, West Virginia, and the Carolinas. Culturally this seems to be a good place to go after carry, since Maryland is the outlier in that circuit in terms of issuance of concealed carry licenses, rather than the rule, as New York is in the 2nd Circuit. Dave Hardy notes it looks like a solid case.

UPDATE: I should note that New York shares its circuit with two other states, Vermont, who issues no permits because they are not required, and CT, who do issue permits on a mostly shall-issue basis. But population wise and culturally, New York dominates the Second Circuit.

National Review Online takes a look at the impact, and discusses the various new cases that have appeared. SAF and Gura have a good mix of cases, with varying degrees of risk, and in several different circuit courts. His strategy seems likely to result in some victories. I am less optimistic about the success potential of the NRA-backed Benson suit, largely because the 7th Circuit has shown itself to be fairly hostile to what the Supreme Court is trying to impose on them. I think the 7th Circuit will let Daley keep his onerous laws, not because that is correct legally, but because the 7th Circuit, if they can’t eradicate the right, probably wants it to be relatively meaningless. There’s still plenty of room to try. I wouldn’t care to speculate on the outcome of Nordyke (gun shows on County property) or Maloney (Nunchakus).

I think everyone knows what emotionally damaged and unstable individuals divers are. If they didn’t have tendencies toward suicidal behavior, there would be no such things as cave diving. There is no sea life that is safe as long as we reject reasonable regulations to keep dangerous spear guns out of the hands of emotionally unstable divers.

This is good news. Overall I consider this to be a minor step forward, but what’s more interesting is the process and the votes. This will also be, potentially, the first pro-gun bill that will be sent to President Obama in whole form. His action will be very interesting.

This bill only exempts one firearm of any value, or up to $1,500 for a combination. It’s ambiguous as to whether it covers NFA items, because it covers a “rifle, shotgun, or pistol.” It does not provide a definition of these items, or refer to which definition from the United States Code applies, but my feeling is there’s a good case for NFA items not being included in this exemption.

You can see the recorded votes here.  Even more than the gain we get if this passes, it helps weed out friend from foe. All Republicans except for one voted for this. The one Republican no vote was Charles Djou, who I won’t be donating any more money to. He’s going to lose come November anyway, and I don’t support lost causes that vote against one of my key interests on what should be an easy vote. Even Mike Castle voted yes. Patrick Murphy, my own Congress Critter, voted yes. The no votes are the usual suspects, but some of the yes votes are surprising.

As other countries go, New Zealand is a relatively easy place to own guns, but they are getting more restrictive all the time. Now it looks like they are moving to close the dreaded Air Gun Loophole:

Police Minister Judith Collins announced this month that the Government planned to change the Arms Order to require anyone who bought or owned a pre-charged pneumatic (PCP) air rifle to hold a firearms licence.

The moves comes after undercover policeman Don Wilkinson and an east Auckland man were killed in separate incidents after being repeatedly shot with a PCP FX Monsoon semi-automatic air rifles.

The United Kingdom regulates air guns according to muzzle energy. Even over here, you’ll often hear the term F.A.C. in regards to air guns. In the UK, any air rifle over 12 ft. lbs. of muzzle energy requires the owner to hold a Fire Arms Certificate, just as they would with an ordinary rifle. I’m not sure whether that’s based on manufacturer specifications, or whether you can go to jail if you modify your rifle and accidentally push it over. I would suspect the latter. You know if they did that here it would be the latter. In fact, if it were here, ATF would fire dozens of different types and weights of pellets through until they got the number they wanted to prosecute you, even if nothing you fired out of it ever exceeded 12 ft. lbs.

Chuckling at the surreal:

Tehama County Sheriff Clay Parker didn’t know that he would be named as the lead plaintiff on a suit challenging a new law that would require handgun ammunition buyers to register with the government.

“I wasn’t expecting that,” he said Tuesday, chuckling as he recounted opening his mail last week and seeing the civil complaint with “Sheriff Clay Parker v. The State of California” on the cover sheet.

It’s a very friendly piece worth a click.

John Lott must have gotten upset when he read Dennis Henigan’s latest attack on him and his work, because he’s firing back today on Breitbart’s Big Government, pointing out that they are, surprise, distorting the record.

By the way, gun control folks, I think you lost the moral high ground on the whole Mary Rosh thing.

Some folks are worried the Kansas legislature is treating carry more like a right, rather than a privilege. I should note, however, that I think making carrying while intoxicated a crime is constitutional, but some of provisions relating to the Kansas concealed carry requirements probably shouldn’t be. To me the main provision that would be unconstitutional is the breathalyzer requirement, which forces the surrendering your 4th and 5th Amendment rights in order to exercise your Second Amendment rights. We can do this with cars because operating a vehicle on the public roadways is not a right.