Guns – Page 325 – Shall Not Be Questioned

The Politicization of Medicine

Children are safest in homes without guns, the AAP statement notes. It adds that pediatricians should tell parents that storing guns properly (unloaded, in a locked cabinet, with ammunition locked up separately) is the next-best option, providing substantial protection against suicides and unintentional gun injuries to children and teenagers when compared to storing firearms unlocked and loaded.

I don’t really have a problem with physicians speaking about guns in the home in the context of other potential household dangers, many of which kill more kids each year than guns. One should beware of owning pools, bathtubs, and 5 gallon buckets. But singling out guns as a unique danger, or suggesting they be removed from the home, is using the medical profession to promote a political agenda. I think doctors, many of which are gun owners, need to start speaking out about the politicization of their profession in manners like this.

Coverage of the Courts in NRA Ads

I was pleased to see this ad:

UPDATE: Also this from the Florida Senate Race:

How to be Paranoid and Afraid on Halloween

Joan Peterson, Brady Board member extraordonaire, meets Hickok45, and hilarity ensues. These people would have made fantastic Puritans, wouldn’t they? Remember not to be so afraid and paranoid, and to ask parents whether there’s a gun in the home when you take the kids trick or treating. Also, don’t carve pumpkins with guns! Heavens no!

UPDATE: Joe Huffman seems to agree with Joan Peterson that carving pumpkins with guns isn’t necessarily the best way to celebrate Halloween.

Stop Touching It

It really is a good lesson that bears repeating.

RIP, Mr. Dobrowolski, You’ve Earned It

Oldest known Auschwitz Survivor dies at 108. He lead an underground effort to continue educating Poles, after the Nazis had forbidden the education of “inferior races.” Today I am determined there shall be no more “inferior races” in this world. And what is the best way to make men equal? I think we know the answer more than many.

The “Terror Gap” Nightmare

If you listen to our political opponents, no one who gets flagged by the no-fly list can possibly be trusted with a firearm – even in the home or used for hunting. They are clearly a danger to society. We hear stories about babies ending up on the list and all sorts of other problems that come from similar names. However, here’s one that was supposedly an exact match of name, social security number, and date of birth.

Yet, he’s cleared to carry a concealed firearm based on a recent background check, he was cleared to ride on an Air Force flight on his way to a foreign country, and he was given a place to stay on the Pearl Harbor naval base while the bureaucrats took time to clean up their mess.

In other words, a guy who is no apparent danger to our country and has no record that should indicate he’s a problem should be a prohibited person according to anti-gun politicians and groups. No accountability, no recourse, just take away people’s fundamental rights. Thank goodness they aren’t going to win that fight. Instead of losing his right to own firearms, the guy in this story was just out five days of hotel expenses in Hawaii and a trip to see his wife who is serving our country.

Which State Has The Most Legal Machine Guns?

It would seem it’s Virginia. There’s some speculation as to why that is. Of course, if you ever go to the National Firearms Museum at NRA Headquarters in Fairfax, they have an enviable collection. I wouldn’t be surprised if they aren’t single handedly helping contribute to Virginia’s first place finish. There aren’t that many full auto firearms out there, so it’s not inconceivable if a museum that had hundreds of samples is located within a single state, it’s going to bump that state’s numbers up not insignificantly.

Article on Philadelphia Publishing of Permit Holders

Folks might remember a little bit back in the summer, the City of Philadelphia published the names of people who had appealed their denial of concealed carry permits. I had looked into some of the background of these individuals, and found some of the denials rather questionable. A reporter for the Philadelphia Daily News has taken up the story, and talked to some of the people involved here, including an Licenses and Inspections spokeswoman who had to have given the quote of the day by saying,Â “We touch a lot of people’s lives in a lot of intimate ways.”

It does appear that there are going to be lawsuits over this disclosure, and we’re happy for that. Kudos to William Bender of the Daily News for taking up the story. Gun owners don’t really demand the media be pro-gun, and I wouldn’t classify this article as advocacy. It’s a good example of reporting on an potential unlawful abuse of authority by those in power, and that’s something I believe is in the public interest for journalists to pursue regardless of the subject matter at hand.

Jindal: “It’s time we protected gun rights.”

Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal has an op-ed on the need to pass Amendment 2 in November. I appreciate that he broke it down to explain it to those who just assume that gun rights are “protected” without really knowing anything about the legal debates:

Simply put, this amendment to Louisiana’s Constitution acknowledges the fundamental right to keep and bear arms for legitimate purposes, and it requires any restriction on gun ownership be subject to strict scrutiny.

It’s our own Second Amendment, if you will, a new constitutional provision to repair the damage done by past judicial interpretations. You see, over the years, Louisiana courts have applied a “rational basis” legal standard to interpreting our right to bear arms. In reality, that means that the state has almost unlimited authority to confiscate, prohibit or infringe on this fundamental right. Make no mistake, I have no intention of allowing such a bill to leave my desk without a veto, but our liberties should not be held hostage to whims of future legislators and governors. By applying the “strict scrutiny” test, we elevate the protections in our constitution to the same level we provide our right to free speech.

Jindal also goes into the arguments about the federal courts being only vote away from rewriting the Second Amendment and what Congress has done to try and keep some of the assaults on gun rights that happened after Katrina from happening again, but the theme is definitely that Louisiana needs its own protection of the fundamental right just in case the whims of Congress or the federal courts change. I hope that gun owners who don’t normally follow the issue closely down there get a chance to read this piece.

It Doesn’t Matter What You Think, It Matters What They Think

From the Brady Center event, I think it’s worthwhile to point out a question asked by the Center to Justice Stevens on the subject of those horribly, wrongly-informed American people who believe they have rights even though the Brady lawyers know better:

I don’t care how long I’ve been working the activism side for this issue, it will never cease to amaze me the sheer number of gun owners who believe that just because they – and likely all of their friends and family – believe something to be a right, it’s protected by the legal system. That’s simply not true. When it comes to keeping gun ownership legal, it really doesn’t matter what the founding documents actually say. All that ultimately matters is how the government interprets it and enforces any laws they pass on the issue of gun ownership.

It kind of reminds me of a story I was told by a Massachusetts gun owner who was talking to a Pennsylvania gun owner at the NRA convention in Pittsburgh back in 2004. After hearing about the variety of gun laws there and the licensing nightmare that determines what kinds of guns you’re allowed to own and how you can use them, the Pennsylvania guy just responded with, “But this is America!” Yeah, buddy, it is America. Welcome. I just hoped he started paying more attention to the issue after hearing those stories.