Guns – Page 1045 – Shall Not Be Questioned

Supremes Announce Nothing

SCOTUSBlog tells us that The Court has not said whether or not they’ll hear the case. Looks like we’re waiting a while longer folks.

The next date for possible action on it is likely to be November 26, following a pre-Thanksgiving Conference set for November 20.

It’s interesting. I wonder whether they didn’t get to it? Or did were they unable to come to an agreement? I don’t really know how this stuff works. Perhaps someone could enlighten.

UPDATE: I kind of wonder whether they perhaps would prefer to deal with it before the holidays, when people aren’t paying much attention to the news cycle. Pure speculation on my part. What think you all?

UPDATE: SCOTUSBlog has updated:

The Court, of course, does not explain inaction. But among the possible reasons for delaying the case are these: one or more Justices simply asked for more time to consider the two cases; the Court may be rewriting the question or questions it will be willing to review â€” especially in view of the disagreement between the two sides on what should be at issue; the Court may have voted initially to deny review of one or both cases and one or more Justices are writing a dissent from the denial. The appeal in 07-290 (District of Columbia v. Heller) raises the key issue about the Second Amendmentâ€™s meaning and the appeal in 07-335 (Parker v. District of Columbia) poses a question about who may bring lawsuits to challenge laws before they are actively enforced. Together, the cases thus present a somewhat complex mix for the Court, and it perhaps was not much of a surprise that no order issued on Tuesday. At no point is there likely to be an answer to what happened to bring about the delay. Both cases are expected to be re-listed for the Nov. 20 Conference.

Not sure if this indicates anything about what result we might be able to expect.Â My guess is no.

STI To California: “We’re Outta Here”

STI International has pulled itself from the California market, for both civilian and law enforcement.Â This is great news, and kudos for STI for doing.Â We need a few of the big guys to do this too.

What Would We Do?

Joe Huffman asks what people would do if the Supreme Court rules the second amendment is an anachronism, and we eventually start losing our gun rights.

I agree with him, that I don’t think gun owners would do much.Â I’ll be honest with you all, I’d probably not turn in the ammunition first, as I have no desire to fight for a lost cause against a law that’s not really enforceable. Â Show me real opposition, and I might join, but aside from that, I plaster an off the books AR up in my wall with a “Break Wall In Event of a Emergency” note in my head, and keep a few thousand rounds of ammunition. Â Then I’d be praying we soon develop technology to terraform other plants, because I think I’m starting to believe that in order to maintain liberty, people need the option of saying “Screw you guys, I’m going west!”

The Big Day

Today is the day we hear about the Heller case.Â Are you nervous?Â I’m crapping thumbtacks.

Busy Beaver

The Bench of Evil got quite a workout tonight, now that I have all the things I need to go to town.Â I reloaded 40 rounds of 6.8 Rem. SPC and loaded 50 rounds of .223.

Started off loading some .223 rounds.Â This is starting with fresh Winchester brass.Â I’m using CCI small rifle primers.Â Sierra 55gr Spitzer boat tail bullets, and 20 grains of IMR-4198 powder.Â Going is slow at first as I get used to everything.Â I spilled some of the powder all over the table, and had to do cleanup.Â Put one primer in seated backwards, and thought better of trying to decap a live primer from the business end.

I managed to do the 40 rounds of 6.8 Remington SPC a good bit faster than the .223, but that’s not counting the decapping, resizing and cleaning I did prior to tonight.Â I’m using Sierra OTM 115gr bullets, and 22 grains of the same powder.

The real reward will be firing them out of the rifle without anything blowing up.Â I’m a little disappointed it took me all night to reload probably 30 minutes worth of ammo at the range, but I figure I’ll get faster.Â My next purchase will be a reasonable electronic scale.

Shirley Katz Update

Looks like the judge ruled against her:

“The District policy applies to only employees and others working for the District. The policy is known to those persons in advance. They accept their jobs subject to, and knowing, the policy.

ORS 166.170 does not prohibit the District from enacting the challenged employment policy. The District has the right to enforce its policy.”

Disappointing, but not entirely unexpected.

LCTF Revoked for Open Carrying

I’ve just become aware of a case in Franklin County, PA of a gentleman who was open carrying while voting last Tuesday, which is perfectly lawful in Pennsylvania, with or without a license to carry firearms. Seems he had a relatively hostile encounter with a Pennsylvania Constable:

When I went to my polling place tonight I was asked by the Constable there if “that was a weapon”. I replied that it was. He said I would have to leave because weapons were not allowed in the polling place. I asked him what law this was based on. He said it was in the Voting Regulations, to which I replied “That applies to police officers”. He said that was correct. He got the regulation book and asked if I would step outside to discuss the matter. I agreed. He turned to the page that had the regulation regarding the police and read it off to me. I told him that I agreed completely, BUT, I was not a police officer, just a private citizen. This seemed to surprise him a bit.

He then made a call to someone who would “Know for sure”. The result of that call was that whoever he called was also unable to come up with anything specific preventing me from voting while carrying. When the call was done, the Constable asked me to please secure my weapon in my vehicle before voting, because it would make him “more comfortable”. I asked him if I would be refused entry to vote if I did not, he said no, that I would be permitted to vote either way. As we went back up the steps and prepared to enter, he stated that he “Just couldn’t understand why someone would need to bring a gun here, especially in this day and age.”

Read the whole thing. A few days later a letter arrives in the mail informing this gentleman that his License to Carry Firearms has been revoked, citing Title 18 Â§ 6109 (e)(1)(i):

[A license shall not be issued to] an individual whose character and reputation is such that the individual would be likely to act in a manner dangerous to public safety.

So the sheriff in Franklin County apparently believes that using your License to Carry Firearms to, you know, actually carry a firearm, and standing up for your right to do so, makes you a person “who’s character or reputation is such” that you are “dangerous to public safety.”Â What does Sheriff Bob Wollyung think he’s issues licenses for?Â Did he think, maybe that people might want an LTCF to, I don’t know, carry a firearm?

I am becoming increasingly intolerant of the abuse ofÂ Â§ 6109 (e)(1)(i) that I’m seeing in our Commonwealth, and I will support any effort to repeal that discretion which it seems entirely too many jurisdictions are willing to use improperly.

British Gun Control Advocates More Honest

Joe goes over the list of objectives for at least one international gun control organization, and notes they want to eliminate the basic right of self-defense.

Just One More Law

Just one more law is all it will take to stop the illegal flow of guns. Here in Pennsylvania, they say one-gun-a-month is a vital tool needed to combat firearms trafficking to criminals. The same people told us years ago we had to ban private sales on handguns to combat trafficking to criminals, and we did that. So now, “Just One More Law”. But look at how well it’s worked out for the United Kingdom:

Noonan’s brother Dominic was arrested in May of that year in possession of a blank-firing gun that had been imported from Germany and then converted into a deadly weapon. He was later jailed.

But the gun was one of a batch of hundreds imported from Germany by a gang who had employed an engineer to convert them.

The article goes on to say the reason criminals are manufacturing firearms is because it’s a heftier profit margin to machine a blank firing replica gun into a firing gun, than it is to buy real ones on the black market. Hardly surprising, but now Britain is pushing the EU to place regulations on replica guns. All it will take is “just one more law”, and the criminals will give up making a living by trying to hurt others. If the gun control folks want to know why we aren’t willing to work together, it’s because they will always need “just one more law.”

UPDATE: More from Jeff.

UPDATE: Ahab too.

Friends Dinner

Bitter and I just returned from a “Friends of the NRA” Banquet at the Middletown Township Country Club. For those of you who aren’t familiar with the Friends Banquets, it’s 35 dollars per person, or 60 dollars per couple for the dinner. Before the dinner there are all kinds of raffles and silent auctions, followed by a live auction after dinner. Prizes are anything from cash prizes to firearms. Sadly, I didn’t win any of the raffles, though we came close. If we had arrived 5 minutes earlier, we would have been a winner. But I did win one silent auction item:

I thought it was cheesy, but Bitter liked it, so I bid on it, and put it over my Bench of Evil. The proceeds for the dinner, raffles and auctions go to the NRA Foundation, and doesn’t go to any of their political stuff. The Foundation does educational outreach and support for the shooting sports, so even if you don’t like NRA’s politics, it’s always safe to give to the Foundation if you just want to support the shooting sports. Half of the proceeds are guaranteed go to supporting shooting programs in the state hosting the dinner, in our case, Pennsylvania.