Veto on Arizona Bills

According to Dave Hardy, Napolitano has vetoed two gun bills.  The first:

Gov. Janet Napolitano vetoed legislation Tuesday which would have allowed individuals to draw their weapons in cases where a reasonable person would believe it is necessary to protect against the use or attempted use of physical force.

I have to say, I agree with the governor on this one.  Unless you’re justified in using deadly force, your gun should stay in its holster.  For situations like the one described here:

“You wait ’til the big 6-foot-5, 280-pound guy knocks you on the ground and incapacitates you before you can tell him, ‘I’ve got a gun,’ ” he said.

“If that big guy threatens you, the next thing is he’s going to hit you,” Pearce explained, at which point “it’s too late to say anything.” He said Napolitano missed the whole point of the bill.

There’s already force disparity defenses to deal with that situation if you have to use deadly force on someone much larger than you, even if the offending party doesn’t have a weapon.  Fists can be considered deadly weapons under some circumstances.  One reason I think carrying OC [self-defense spray] is a good idea is because it’s useful for getting out of a physical altercation where deadly force wouldn’t be justified.  While I agree with eliminating duties to retreat, allowing people to bring deadly force into a situation that has not yet escalating into that grave a situation seems like a bad idea.

The other bill Nepolitano vetoed was this:

Napolitano separately vetoed another measure Tuesday which would have made state-issued permits to carry a concealed weapon valid for the owner’s lifetime.

Little reason to veto this, since most state law enforcement agencies are monitoring criminal records of license holders and will revoke if you do something that makes you unqualified.  The renewal is just a hoop to jump through so everyone can feel better.

UPDATE: It seems I may be misunderstanding Arizona law here.  In Pennsylvania, we have no law against brandishing a firearm.  If you pull a gun on someone, and don’t use it, you’re not liable if the bad guy beats a retreat or backs down, as long as the circumstances that caused you to draw was a deadly force situation.  Folks are suggesting that’s not the case in Arizona.  If Arizona law does punish for drawing, but not shooting, then that would seem to be something that should be fixed.

UPDATE: After looking at Arizona Revised Statutes on Justification, I’m not sure I was misunderstanding it.  I have more information and questions here.

AHSA Not a Sham, Because Tom Eblen Believes It

SayUncle covers the machinations of Tom Eblen, who apparently wants to believe AHSA is not a sham, no matter what the facts say.  Bob Ricker recently came back on Bitter’s site to remind us that NRA’s endorsement isn’t worth crap, and that their organization helped Claire McCaskill beat Jim Talent in Missouri, so take that you self-defense wackos.  Of course, they also endorsed Obama, who then proceeded to lose in Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Indiana, and Kentucky — states with a lot of gun owning Democrats.  So I think it’s fair to question whether AHSA’s endorsement is really worth anything.

To Keep and Bear Knives

I first became aquainted with the knife rights movement at the annual meeting last year in St. Louis, and took one of their buttons.  I don’t see any reason why knives shouldn’t be considered personal arms, protected by the second amendment, and Pennsylvania’s right to bear arms provision.  Joe Huffman has a pretty good post up about this here.

Pennsylvania’s knife laws are, for the most part, fairly lax, but our state law prohibits switchblades:

Pa. C.S.A. 18.908. Prohibited offensive weapons.

(a) Offense defined.–A person commits a misdemeanor of the first degree if, except as authorized by law, he makes, repairs, sells, or otherwise deals in, uses, or possesses any offensive weapon.

(b) Exception.– It is a defense under this section for the defendant to prove by a preponderance of evidence that he possessed of dealt with the weapon solely as a curio or in a dramatic performance, or that he possessed it briefly in consequence of having found it or taken it from an aggressor, or under circumstances similarly negativing any intent or likelihood that the would be used unlawfully.

(c) Definition.–As used in this section, the following words and phrases shall have the meanings given to them in this subsection:

“Firearm.” — Any weapon which is designed to or may readily be converted to expel any projectile by the action of an explosive or the frame or receiver of any such weapon.
“Offensive weapons.” — Any bomb, grenade, machine gun, sawed-off shotgun with a barrel less than 18 inches, firearm specially made or specially adapted for concealment or silent discharge, any blackjack, sandbag, metal knuckles, dagger, knife, razor or cutting instrument, the blade of which is exposed in an automatic way by switch, push-button, spring mechanism, or otherwise, or other implement for the infliction of serious bodily injury which serves no common lawful purpose.

There’s an exception for law enforcement, and for people who have complied with the requirements of the National Firearms Act for the firearms provisions.  State law allows for carriage of a knife as big as you want, as long as it’s not a switchblade.  The only problem is, there’s no preemption for knives, so local ordinances can apply.

It’s a silly law.  A knife is no more dangerous because it is actuated by a button or spring mechanism than if I can open it with one hand, but case law in Pennsylvania has ruled that a knife that can be flicked open by wrist action after releasing a lock is not covered by this law.

Steamrolling Guns

Gunpundit has an example of what other countries are doing to gun owners.   Look at the firearms laid out in the path of the steam roller.   Do they look like guns that were seized from rebel groups?  Or do they look like ordinary household guns that might be used to take game, and defend families?

We Have to Unite Against SKS 47s

No, really.

“Today we’re having a conversation on whether an SKS 47 (photo)  should not be banned from use in the city of Philadelphia. Can you imagine having a conversation, having to fight back a challenge to some who would say that that should be okay, we should not ban that weapon.”

Click on the article, and see the picture, which features a Kalashnikov type rifle, and an SKS type rifle.  I’m not sure which one is an SKS 47.  These idiots don’t even have any clue what they are talking about banning.

John Lott on Crime in Philadelphia

He says there’s no proof that gun control solves any problems.  This is something Philadelphians desperately need to hear.  The politicians already know this, but they are hoping their constituents don’t, and as long as they can keep blaming Harrisburg, they don’t have to answer for their own failures.  Kudos for Dr. Lott for getting the message out there in our toxic media environment.

Important CCW Improvements in Ohio

Brent Greer informs us that there’s about to be an important vote in Ohio on CCW improvements.  I like what I see:

The amendment provides a legal way for a person who does not have a concealed handgun license to transport an unloaded firearm in a motor vehicle. It allows a concealed handgun licensee to pick up a child from school, to carry a concealed firearm in one’s own home without a license, to carry concealed in places such as grocery stores that sell alcohol for off-site consumption, to carry concealed in publicly-owned facilities such as park shelters, parking garages, and highway rest stop buildings, and to carry in an unlocked, closed glove compartment or center console.

I carried in Ohio on my way to the NRA Annual Meeting, but rest stops are posted because they are public buildings.  I’m pretty sure someone intent on mugging someone at a rest area isn’t paying much attention to the posting.  This looks like a major improvement to Ohio’s carry laws.

Brady Campaign Mirepresents FOID in Illinois

Thirdpower reports some problems with how the Brady Campaign is representing the Illinois FOID card.  The gun control crowd would be happy to pass licensing in other states, and will tell you it’s a “reasonable measure” and is “common sense.”  Illinois already has it, but apparently it’s not enough.  Is it any wonder we think the goal is just to make owning a gun so difficult that no one bothers?  Then, it’ll be “common sense” and “reasonable” to just ban them altogether.

Where do I sign up?

Mixing explosives, blowing things up, and precision shooting, all in one place?  I would love to go to Joe’s gun blogger day at Boomershoot, but it’ll hinge on the employment situation, which looking into April of 2009 might be a bit untenable if the company I work for runs out of money.