Guns – Page 76 – Shall Not Be Questioned

Wisconsin Proposing Range Rule Changes

DNR officials plan to present a wide-ranging package of regulations to their board next month that would prohibit the possession and consumption of alcohol on the ranges as well as prohibit shooters from using fully automatic weapons and tracer ammunition. Incendiary, exploding and breakable targets would be banned, although clay trap targets would be allowed. Shooters would have to unload their weapons when they’re off the firing line.

I don’t have an issue with prohibiting alcohol at the ranges. I’m surprised that isn’t already a rule. But do they really have issue with people shooting up public ranges with machine guns? I can see a ruleÂ prohibitingÂ shooting glass and other items that could junk up a public range and create a hazard. Incendiary targets pose a fire hazard, so I can see that too. Exploding targets, well, that just sounds like fun to me, but I could see where you’d get people who abuse it. What do you think? Most of these rule changes, save the machine gun ban and maybe the rule about explosive targets, don’t sound too objectionable. What do you think?

What Does the Merger of Law Center with Gifford’s Organization Mean?

Since my time has been short this week, by now most of you have probably heard from other sources that Gabby Giffords group, Americans for Responsible Solutions has merged with the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. I’ve read several takes on this, and usually when something like this happens, it means one of them was too short on money to continue functioning. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again, without Bloomberg’s money coming into the fight, most of these gun control groups would have either folded up shop years ago, or would have descended into a jobs program for a small handful of passionate, yet irrelevant people. Bloomberg’s money is the only thing keeping this issue alive.

Giffords was pretty successful at fundraising for her PAC from high-profile billionaires, including Bloomberg, but fundraising for their 501(c)(4) started out strong, but then took a dive. Could be Giffords and Kelly were just tired and wanted out. But it’s hard to believe that finances didn’t play a role, even if the group’s trouble was long term. I haven’t seen recent 990s from Brady yet. I can’t imagine they are in very good shape at this point.

Obama’s Scalia Replacement

President Obama will announce his nominee to replace Justice Scalia shortly. The press reports that it is Merrick Garland.

Not surprisingly, he’s got a record that does not point to a positive future for the Second Amendment if he is confirmed.

This article from Dave Kopel in 2008 warned of Garland on a short list to be appointed, and he cited red flags from Garland’s role in Parker v. District of Columbia and NRA v. Reno. Kopel summed it up this way:

Merrick Garland is a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. He could be counted on not only to oppose Second Amendment rights in general, but even to nullify explicit congressional statutes that protect those rights.

More recently, even National Review noted that Garland’s positions on the Second Amendment were enough cause for worry since the White House indicated they might choose someone “moderate,” and these aren’t signs of moderate positions on the right to keep and bear arms.

Media Matters had a post up early this morning trying to claim that these previous moves are “myths,” and that he’s not really anti-Second Amendment. I guess that means the White House knows it will be a problem. Now would be a great time to call your Senator and let them know what you think about this nominee.

Enhanced Preemption Probably Lost Due to Single Subject Requirement

Pennsylvania’s enhanced preemption measure, Act 192, got off to a rough start when it had to be attached to a metal theft bill at the last minute, and then quickly signed by the outgoing Governor Corbett. This happened because of Senator Greenleaf’s obstinance in committee. The only way to get it onto the Senate floor was to amend it to another bill.

The problem is that Pennsylvania has a single subject requirement for bills, and it’s a stretch to argue that metal theft and firearm preemption are the same subject. It was more than two years ago the lawsuits started. Now the case has been argued before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, and it’s being noted that it doesn’t look good for Act 192. Act 192 has been unenforceable since a stay was issued in a lawsuit until the constitutionality of the act could be determined. Still, even if the Supreme Court refuses toÂ Â Act 192, the law still did some good during the time period when it hadn’t yet been challenged.

If we can get rid of Wolf in a few years, we might have another shot at this. I’m also at the point where I would even be willing to help out a leftist Dem challenger to Greenleaf just to get him off that committee chairmanship.

Don’t Believe Bloomberg’s Polls

It’s good to see that progress is being made in Idaho in regards to constitutional carry, but Bloomberg is doing his level best to fight it. They are disingenuously trying to pass off support for the concealed carry permitting system as opposition to constitutional carry. Consider this poll they are putting in front of lawmakers:

Under current Idaho law, people are required to have a permit in order to carry a concealed handgun in public places. In order to get a permit, people may need to complete a handgun-safety training course and must pay a processing fee. Do you … strongly support? Support? Oppose? Or strongly oppose … requiring permits to carry a concealed handgun in public in Idaho?

How would you answer this question? A no answer could be taken for not supporting concealed carry at all. It’s not like they offer the option for “No, I don’t support it because I don’t think you should need a permit.”

What this is reflecting is strong support for the current system, which is bad news for Bloomberg’s overall goals, not good news.

Weekly Gun News – Edition 30

It’s not often I’ll start out with a news post on Monday, but if I sit on some of these links, they’ll go stale.

Bill to legalize silencers passes out of committee…. in Massachusetts. I think the hearing argument is a powerful one. We should ask our opponents why they want people to go deaf? Traditional hearing protection can interfere with the ability to hear range commands, which is also a safety issue.

Yes, next question: “Did Guns Doom Hillary in Michigan?”

A counter drone system. Looks good for one or two drones, but what about a swarm attack?

The only thing that can stop a bad guy with a hatchet, is a good guy with a gun.

Anti-gun Republicans are a rare breed these days, but where I grew up, you can still find them in the wild. There’s almost nowhere to shoot in Delco. There’s one club, and one public range, and I’ve seen enough unsafe things in that public range that I won’t shoot there. That’s not good for a healthy gun culture.

Let’s hope this is a trend: Jury nullification instructions coming to New Hampshire.

Trump & Guns: Bob Owens correctly points out some really bad advice. The law frowns on shooting people threatening or using non-deadly force.

Don’t for a minute think folks like this wouldn’t take your gunsÂ if given half the chance.

European gun control push on hold for now. They learned exactly the wrong lessons from the Paris attacks.

Maryland is looking to make colleges and universities gun free zones. Meanwhile, Georgia is moving in the opposite direction.

Yellow Journalism: Inside the Crackdown on Florida’s Shady Private Gun Dealers. They are conflating very illegal sales with lawful private sales.

Miguel on Colorado Magazine Ban: “When you see Dudley Brown, Be Sure to Thank Him.” The Dems were willing to cut a deal to do at least a partial repeal of the ban, but it was scuttled by Dudley. Now Coloradans are probably stuck with the 15 round limit forever.

“What liberals can learn from the NRA.” It’s not just liberals. A lot of conservative and libertarian groups would do well to look at how NRA does things.

Ban cars? Ban private sales of cars? No more lending your keys to your buddy! That would be the gun control mentality applied here: “Pedestrian deaths appear to be climbing: Can we reverse the trend.”

Trump’s supporters aren’t notably authoritarian, according to the WaPo. There’s a lot more authoritarianism to go around than I’m comfortable with, but that’s nothing new.

A private transfer ban is being considered in Minnesota.

Looks like Facebook’s anti-gun-sale policies aren’t really having much of an effect. It’s almost like gun control doesn’t work at all!

How Gun Control Supporting is Your District?

John Richardson points to an interesting map showing support for gun control.Â It looks to me done by congressional district. Looking at the source, I’m doubtful this is a scientific poll, because the participants are self-selected, but I like how they broke down the data in this manner:

My district (8th) is a big greenish, so about split, but 6th and 7th district are a lot more yellow than I’d like them to be. That’s not necessarily disaster, however.

As it stands now, all those district are represented by Republicans, two of which (Fitzpatrick & Meehan) are soft on the gun issue, but 6th (Costello) is more solid. An intensity gap can make up for an unfavorable public viewpoint, but I’ve found gun owners in Southeastern Pennsylvania are largely apathetic about protecting the right for themselves and future generations. That’s not everybody. There are people here definitely willing to stand up and be counted, but not nearly enough given how many gun owners live here and what we’re up against. To some degree we’ve always free-ridden on the work of Western Pennsylvanians. But that will end as that part of the state depopulates.

The Gilt Negligent Shooting Brings Out the Worst

The media went absolutely ape shit over the story that Jamie Gilt was accidentally shot by her 4-year old son, who retrieved the firearm off the floor of the vehicle and shot mom with it. My guess is she put the firearm under the seat and it slid back to where the kid could get it. The lessons here are pretty obvious:

The best place for a gun is strapped on your person in a quality holster that offers good trigger protection.
Guns belong in holsters, always, even if you’re carrying off body (a less than ideal solution to begin with). Triggers must be protected from external manipulation. My guns never leave their holsters unless they are being fired, cleaned, or stored unloaded for a protracted period of time (which never happens).
If you’re going to do vehicle carry, in a locked container within the car (and in a holster) is more prudent than tossing it under a seat. I’ve also seen ways to mount holsters to a vehicle that provides a reasonable degree of control while the driver is in the driver’s seat.
Carrying a firearm regularly is a serious commitment. If you’re not really willing to be serious about it, you’re probably better off leaving it secured at home. Tossing a gun under a seat when you have kids in the car is not being serious about the responsibilities that go with carrying a deadly weapon.
Teach your kids not to touch guns. They should understand firearms are very dangerous. Kids of a certain age don’t always listen, so that’s why we do the previous things I’ve mentioned.

Of course, apparently the media has decided if you post a few pro-Second Amendment Facebook posts that means you’re a “gun activist.”Â I believe this is deliberate on the part of the media, because the implication is that if even the die-hards can’t carry firearms safely, what makes you ordinary folkÂ can do it safely? This is certainly bringing out the worst of the media.

It’s also bringing out the worst of the anti-gun folks.

No less than three fake facebook pages have been created to do nothing but shame this woman. The comments left on her page and the fake pages are the most inhuman and vile I’ve seen in a very long time.

We claim to be tolerant and inclusive, but people are calling for her sterilization, her child to be taken from her and saying that it’s only too bad that she was not outright killed […]

It’s amazing how violent supposed non-violent people can be when they smell blood in the water.

Funny how that seems to work, isn’t it. In truth there’s plenty of nastiness to go around any public issue, but the claims of peace loving very often ring hollow.

Ms. Lauer seems to offer some other useful adviceÂ on carrying with kids.

Debating Ben Crump on Stand Your Ground

This is back from August, but it’s the first I’ve seen it. Rick Ector of Rick’s Firearms Academy of Detroit debates Ben Crump on Stand Your Ground laws. Rick is absolutely right that the Martin case was a classic self-defense case and had nothing to do with Stand Â Your Ground in Florida. Our opponents can only win by misleading people, as Ben Crump is doing here.

Rick did pretty well if you ask me. Debating on camera is harder than it looks.

Bloomberg Won’t Run

I guess he probably realized that if people like me would have been willing to travel to New York City to sign the petition to get him on the ballot in person, that perhaps it wasn’t such a good idea after all. His candidacy would have:

Pulled more votes from the Democratic nominee than the Republican nominee.
Pulled money away from his gun control efforts to fund his campaign.
Put his gun control efforts front and center, and made it easier for our side to tie Everytown to Bloomberg.
Tied his other unpopular nannying to his gun control efforts.
Reveal the extent to which the entire gun control movement is funded by one rich billionaire.

The way I saw it, there just wasn’t any downside.