2012 Is Looking Up

I shouldn’t really say looking up, since the GOP is still without an interesting or desirable candidate, but I’m happy that Huckabee is out, and I don’t have to spend 2012 listening to him talk about what kind of big government “Jesus juice” he drinks. Now Trump is out, and I don’t have to ponder the possibility of  a guy that lost a fortune in the casino business trying to figure out how to solve our massive deficit.

Now if only Mitt and Santorum would exit stage right (or stage left for Mitt?), things might to start to actually look up. Sure, there’s still Gingrich, but we can still hold out hope that the 90s will call, and ask for their candidate back.

Quote of the Day

Via Volokh commentary on the decision by the Indiana Supreme Court to eliminate the right to resist unlawful entry of a government agent. This quote is attributed to William Pitt, Earl of Chatham, after whom the city if Pittsburgh is named:

The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the forces of the Crown. It may be frail; its roof may shake; the wind may blow through it; the storm may enter; the rain may enter; but the King of England cannot enter – all his force dares not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement!

Indiana is not alone in eliminating common law provisions in regards to resisting unlawful intrusions by the state on property or person. A number of states had already eliminated this right by statute, including, in part, Pennsylvania (no right to resist an unlawful arrest). We’ve strayed from William Pitts’ ideal, and I don’t think we’re better off for it.

Luzerne County Lowers Permit Fee

The new Sheriff of Luzerne County is lowering the fee for License to Carry from $31 to $20. This is good news, because overcharging for LTCs has been a persistent problem among PA Sherrifs. It’s good at least one is doing something about it.

Constitutional Carry in Pennsylvania

As much as I’d love to see Constitutional Carry happen in Pennsylvania, there are a few problems associated with getting it done. The chief problem, that I see, is that Senate Judiciary is headed by Stu Greenleaf, who only tends to be pro-gun when he really feels like it. In addition to Greenleaf, there are a number of other weak kneed Republican Senators who would make passage of such a bill problematic. Remember that last year, we did not have the votes on Judiciary to even keep the silly Florida Loophole amendment off HB40. There are ways around the committee, but they can be problematic avenues.

What makes Pennsylvania problematic for Constitutional Carry is that the southeast is becoming less pro-gun. The Democrats here are almost uniformly anti, and the Republicans are precarious enough they don’t want to stake out strong positions on contentious issues. If suburban legislators start voting along with their urban counterparts, it’s over for this issue, and there are a lot of suburban GOP legislators that don’t think there will be much pro-gun cover for their votes in this decidedly anti-gun media market. Just as an example, we tried to knock off Steve Santarsiero this past election by backing the campaign of Rob Ciervo, and failed by a few hundred votes. It’s tough to unseat even the anti-gun politicians around here, let alone unseat the softies. Without some more solid representation on the gun issue in the suburbs, I’m afraid Constitutional Carry is going to be a serious uphill battle in the Keystone State.

When Commenting on Hunting is Just a Comment on Hunting

This was originally going to be a comment over at No Lawyers, but I really hate having to register with new accounts to comment. John posted about the annual Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation Congressional Shoot-Out, and he noted some of the press release quotes that caught his attention:

It is good to see both Democrats and Republicans supporting the shooting sports. However, judging from some of the comments by the co-chairs, many of these legislators still confuse supporting duck hunting with supporting the Second Amendment.

I don’t think it’s fair to criticize them for making hunting-related comments in a press release from an organization focused on hunting & fishing policy representing a caucus dedicated to hunting & fishing legislative topics.

Considering that Rep. Mike Ross is leading the “Second Amendment Task Force” in Congress and has a consistent A+ NRA rating, I don’t think it’s fair to say that he truly believes the Second Amendment is just about hunting. The same goes for Rep. Jeff Miller who has been a member of the Second Amendment Caucus and has an A rating from NRA.

It’s a shooting event to support a caucus that focuses on hunting policy. A press release quote on that very topic doesn’t show any kind of bias against their understanding of gun rights.

Since I’m making this a full post, I’ll also address one of his other suggestions with a dose of DC-practicality.

Next year I’d propose a little different shooting competition. Instead of trap, skeet, and sporting clays, why not make it a 3-gun competition? You’d still have the shotgun involved but would add both rifle and pistol to the mix. Now that would be interesting! It would also show the ATF Shotgun Study team that 3-gun competition is a sporting use.

As an alternative since so many Members of Congress announced after the shooting of Gabby Giffords that they had a concealed carry permit and planned to use it, make it an IDPA pistol competition. That would let us see how serious they are about self-protection and what level of real training they have.

My standard response to this is similar to what I say to people who think that the NRA meeting should be in their backyard: Where would you propose doing all of this? The PG County Trap & Skeet Center only has shotgun ranges. It is chosen as one of the closest ranges to Capitol Hill. The reason why? It’s tough to line up to two dozen members of Congress at the same time to shoot three-different shotgun events that can all happen on the same range. If you waste hours fighting traffic to get members out to a facility that could host any of those events, they won’t come. And then you don’t have any members of Congress participating in any shooting sport.

The other reason is that sporting clays, trap, and skeet are closely related to hunting, one focus of the Congressional Sportsmen’s Caucus. Instead of lamenting that the hunting caucus is doing hunting-related shooting, perhaps these suggestions might go to the Second Amendment Caucus instead.

Bob Mensch Guilty in Summary Charge

State Senator Mensch was found guilty in a Berks County court on a citation for disorderly conduct for allegedly flashing a gun at another motorist on I-78. Mensch denies that he ever displayed the firearm.

From what it sounds like, Mensch took his firearm out when the other motorist followed him off the exit and to a gas station. It seems reasonable to me that the other motorist could have seen it. But I do not believe, unless you point or threaten with a firearm (which can also be a more serious charge), that this amounts to disorderly conduct. Given what Mensch described in the trial, his actions do not seem to me to be unreasonable, presuming he is speaking the truth when he says he did not flash the gun in a threatening manner.

Mensch says he will appeal. I think he should. Having a gun where someone can see it obviously is not a crime. It should need to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Mensch displayed the gun in a threatening manner.

One lesson in all this is that it’s never a wise idea to stop in a road rage scenario. Your vehicle is the best defense you have. If you’re followed off an exit, keep going. If you’re certain the road raging person is following you, call the police. The gun is a last resort in these scenarios.

UPDATE: More here. Seems the other driver claimed Mensch had the gun in his lap. Mensch claims it was a cell phone. The other driver called 911 to report another motorist with a gun. I still say if a gun isn’t displayed in a threatening manner, you don’t have a case of disorderly conduct.