Guns – Page 846 – Shall Not Be Questioned

E-Trace by ATF

Joe Huffman thinks it might be violating the law.Â Depends on the details, but based on what we know, here is the law:

â€œ(i) Prohibition Relating To Establishment of Registration Systems With Respect to Firearms.â€”No department, agency, officer, or employee of the United States mayâ€”

â€œ(1) require that any record or portion thereof generated by the system established under this section be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or political subdivision thereof; or

â€œ(2) use the system established under this section to establish any system for the registration of firearms, firearm owners, or firearm transactions or dispositions, except with respect to persons, prohibited by section 922 (g) or (n) of title 18, United States Code, or State law, from receiving a firearm.

This is in the part of the law that establishes the National Instant Check System.Â What ATF wll probably argue is that since they aren’t compiling NICS data, but just distributor A&D records, that it doesn’t constitute a registry under this section of the law.Â Why is that not entirely comforting?

A Match for Cold Occasions (Winter Gun Blog Rifle Match)

Unfortunately, I did not manage to get a fall gun blog rifle match up, due to the elections, and then having to get caught up on crap after the election.Â But for the Winter Match, I have made a 50 yard Kalashnikov and SKS match, and for the small bore match, I have brought it to indoor ranges, and made it an offhand only match.

If you would like to test your shooting skills against some other bloggers, this is for you.Â Since you can shoot the small bore match at most indoor ranges, I’m happy to get a lot of participants for that.Â If you have a Kalashnikov or SKS, you can also participate in that too, and if you have an indoor range that will allow 50 yard three position (NRA range in Fairfax, VA comes to mind) feel free to use it to shoot this match.Â I will envy you, as I will have to shoot it outside in the cold.

I think it would be cool to offer a prize for this match, for the best picture taken of a competitor shooting under winter conditions.Â I will only ask that you take a picture of yourself shooting in said wintry conditions, and then a picture of you and your target in said wintry conditions so I know you’re not cheating :)Â We will hold a vote here for the best.Â I will also put “They all suck” as a category, and if that wins, no one gets the prize.Â I will offer a 25 dollar gift certificate to MidwayUSA to the winner, if there’s a winner.Â If you’re shooting the match indoors, you can’t qualify, unless you have a particularly sucky indoor range.Â You can qualify with the small bore match if you shoot it outside in horrid conditions.Â If you win the match, you just get bragging rights, but if you shoot the match under horrid winter conditions, hell, that’s worth a 25 dollar certificate.Â There’s still an opprotunity for those in moderate climates to win if you get creative :)

Zeroiong Your Rifle

Papa Delta Bravo has an excellent post about zeroing your AR-15.Â Conventional wisdom might not be wise in this case.Â I have my 16″ barreled AR zeroed the way PDB mentions, and I keep my 20″ AR, which I use for target shooting, zeroed for a 6:00 hold on an SR-1 target at 100 yards.Â I think it’s a good idea to take advantage of the .223s flat trajectory when zeroing a rifle you’re considering using for unusual circumstances.

Duty to Inform Laws

Justin had police encounter while armed.Â Â Traffic accident.Â Pennsylvania does not require you to inform the police if you’re armed.Â I was in a similar situation here, and didn’t inform the State Trooper I was armed.Â As far as I know he never knew I had a Glock 19 concealed at 4:00.Â I figured it would just complicate the situation if I told him, and I’m not a criminal or cop killer.Â One time I did get stopped by the police in Texas while armed, I was fortunate that he asked before I had the opportunity to interject.Â But I’ve always wondered about that requirement.Â I mean, do you have to interrupt the cop if he’s in the middle of asking you a bunch of questions to tell him you’re armed?Â I think the answer is yes, which goes against polite human nature to play along with the conversation flow.

I prefer the Pennsylvania law, which is no requirement to inform.Â I can accept that it ought to be done as a courtesey, but I don’t think it should be the law.

NRA Desperate for Cash?

This looks like typical NRA fundraising to me, which as any member can tell you, they do frequently, even in good times.Â I would have hoped that Washington Monthly would do a bit of research into how NRA is structured, but I guess that’s asking too much.

First, it’s NRA’s PAC that spent 15 million dollars.Â NRA itself can’t legally spend money on electioneering, so NRA-PVF, which is supported entirely through monies donated by membership.Â NRA-PVF can’t use funds NRA raises from membership dues, through extra fundraising, and it definitly can’t draw money from NRA’s endowment (which is part of the NRA Foundation, a different part of NRA).Â It is established entirely to do electioneering, and must have seperate cash sources from NRA proper.

Now, it’s true that PVF needs to refill its warchest in time for the 2010 midterms, but that’s a separate issue from how NRA as a whole is doing.Â It’s also expected.Â I didn’t donate money to PVF this election cycle so they would sit on it.Â I donated it with the expectation that they’d spend it, and spend it they did.

Plus, my understanding is that NRA is actually doing pretty well right now.Â You might think with the news being rich with stories about gun sales being through the roof in anticipation of coming restrictions on gun rights under the new Congress and Administration, that people might also be thinking that maybe it’s time to join (or rejoin) the NRA.Â I’m planning on upgrading to an endowment member, myself.Â NRA is offering steep discounts until January 20th.

Hat Tip to Pro-Gun Progressive

Explaining The Gun Issue

Joe Huffman is trying to educate a blogger advocating reasonable gun control that the laws being advocated are neither reasonable, nor effective controls.Â Most people when asked why they support assault weapons bans, even though they are not often used for criminal purposes resort to “I just don’t see why anyone needs to have one.”

Well, I can think of at least one reason.Â There are certainly more.

“Pretty Safe Bet” from Montana’s Senator

Montana’s junior Senator, Jon Tester, is putting his seat on the line with his support of Barack Obama. I covered it here before when he was actively pulling the wool over everyone’s eyes on Obama’s record. I was disappointed that he went so far to deny that Obama has an anti-gun history, and I still hope that NRA takes those things into account since it went far beyond a simple endorsement of your party’s nominee.

Now, Tester is being questioned about the likely future of gun control since it’s clear gun owners and those who had, until recently, only thought of being gun owners don’t quite believe all of those election promises.

U.S. Sen. Jon Tester says he understands there are plenty of gun owners worried that there could be new gun control measures coming from Washington D.C.

But Tester says Wednesday that he doesn’t see it happening. …

But Tester says he would be really surprised if gun control cleared a Congress focused on other issues.

What should concern Montana residents is that in the same article, Tester doesn’t promise to oppose any gun control that either Obama or Pelosi pushes.Â He just says it’s a “pretty safe bet” that he probably wouldn’t support it.Â How about an absolutely safe bet, Senator?

It is true when he says there should be enough pro-gun votes in the House and Senate to stop any gun control from getting to Obama’s desk.Â But it’s also reasonable for people to be scared and to prepare for a grassroots battle with even some of the otherwise pro-gun Democrats.Â It hasn’t happened on gun control, but on other issues, Pelosi has been pretty successful at keeping the Blue Dogs quiet.Â Those who have battled her have been punished.Â But so far, she doesn’t seem to have overreached on issues the Blue Dog’s swing constituents are following closely.Â It is possible that with the new majorities, she may try to go too far expecting the Blue Dogs to give in like many have over the last two years.Â If she does or if Obama decides that gun control is an easy (and free!) issue to pick on when all of the other left-wing issues are complex and expensive, then Jon Tester will have egg on his face.

Federal Lawsuit Against Delaware County

The county where I grew up was slapped with a federal civil rights lawsuit yesterday for refusing to return lawfully owned guns to residents after they’ve been seized.

The plaintiff, Thomas DeOrio, 21, of Glen Mills, argues that the county government, judges and Sheriff’s Department illegally retain confiscated guns – even if a crime hasn’t been committed – when the owner is entitled to retrieve them.

In DeOrio’s case, Brookhaven police seized his collection of handguns and rifles in October and turned them over to the sheriff when his girlfriend filed for a temporary protection-from-abuse order. Shields said she perceived something he had said to be threatening. Three days later, after a court hearing, a judge dismissed the order, records show.

But DeOrio soon learned that getting his guns back wouldn’t be as easy.

Although the protection-from-abuse order had been thrown out, Shields said the sheriff’s office refused to return the firearms unless DeOrio filed a “legal action.”

The sheriff’s office is claiming that the county doesn’t give him authority to return the guns.Â Unfortunately, the state does say the guns need to be returned.

The plaintiff is represented by the same attorney who NRA is working with to defeat the illegal Philadelphia gun laws.

Chicago Going from Ban to Circus?

Because it’ll be a full three ring performance people will have to go through to exercise their rights:

The mayor said he’s looking at new D.C. laws requiring gun owners to go through five hours of safety training, register their firearms every three years and undergo criminal background checks every six years.

He must be worried he’s going to lose on the incorporation question.Â I would suggest this is progress, but we really want incorporation.Â If the laws are modified, they should be challenged, but we do not yet have a ruling yet from the Supreme Court which says these kinds of restrictions are a violation of the Second Amendment.Â All we have now is you have some vague individual right to a handgun in your home.

I don’t think you can condition the exercise of a fundamental right on having to jump through hoops.Â That’s not to say I think responsible gun owners shouldn’t get training.Â They should.Â I am not opposed to all safety training, just using it as a prior restraint on being able to purchase a firearm.

No Good Will Come from These Negotiations

Gun shop owners negotiate with anti-gun organizations at their own peril.Â These people are not interested in coming to an understanding — they want you out of business and your product banned.Â Give them nothing.Â Do not talk to them.Â We are your customers, and we’re just warning you if you want us to continue patronizing your businesses.