Politics – Page 162 – Shall Not Be Questioned

Senate Investigation of Project Gunrunner

I’ve been reluctant to speak about the accusations going around the blogosphere about the extent that ATF was facilitating trafficking to Mexico. Not that I would put something like this past ATF, but serious accusations require evidence, and until today I hadn’t seen any. Having been in a position of having sensitive information shared with me, it never seemed a good idea to broadcast the fact publicly, rather than directing the information quietly to folks who have the power to do something with it. Otherwise you risk tipping off whoever’sÂ ox is going to get gored, and hand them an opportunity to destroy evidence and discredit your source.

But now we have real evidence that whoever Codrea and VanderboeghÂ have been speaking with is the real deal, and is actively working with the office of Senator Chuck Grassley, as shown in this letter here, and also here, and as detailed on David Codrea’s examiner site.Â Grassley’s office notes that there has been “detailed documentation” which “lends credibility to the claims and partially corroborates them.” We will see where Grassley’s office goes with this.

The whistle blower in this case deserves quite a bit of praise. Federal whistle blower protections are applicable on paper, but are nearly non-existent in practice. Working with Grassley’s office is probably a career ending move for the agent in question, and on top of that he will need to retain a lawyer during this whole process. It’s not clear who’s come forward with this information at this point, but my hat’s off to them.

Our Friends the Republicans, Part II

Looks like they are looking at regulating the Internets in a supremely stupid manner. The GOP really is just Statism Lite, except it is neither less filling, and it sure as hell doesn’t taste great.

UPDATE: Look who’s involved:

And the International Association of Chiefs of Police, which will be sending a representative to tomorrow’s hearing, previously adopted a resolution (PDF) calling for a “uniform data retention mandate” for “customer subscriber information and source and destination information.” The group said today in an e-mail exchange that it still supports that resolution.

Good to see they aren’t limiting themselves to defecating only on Second Amendment rights.

No Right to Own a Gun in New Jersey

Eugene Volokh relays a case where a man was denied buying a gun because he slammed doors very hard.

A Shame

Not much information on this story, but it looks like a retired cop and gun collector died, with no one to take care of the estate. The local criminal population quickly moved in and started stealing from the collection. Once guns started showing up in traces, the police moved in on the abandoned property.

The real shame of it is, this guy pretty clearly was quite a collector, and you an guarantee each and every one of those firearms is now going to be destroyed. If there really are Title II firearms among the collection, as the article says, they will be lost forever to the civilian market. I would be surprised if there are not also historical pieces that will be lost.

You Say That Like It’s a Bad Thing

Headline from the Philippines, “More civilians own guns than military, police.” And the problem with that is what, exactly?

Castle Doctrine: Senate This Time?

Senator Alloway has introduced the Castle Doctrine once again. Since the Senate is where it ran into trouble last session, it makes sense to start out there, though I’d be surprised it there won’t be a concurrent effort in the House. Hopefully with Corbett behind the effort, we won’t run into as many snags, and this can get passed quickly.

A Bad Sign for the Democrats

I actually found this shortly before the election, but I forgot about the pictures on my phone until recently. When I found this card, I looked for a similar anti-Republican one for lefties, but there was none to be found.

New Jersey AG on That Whole “Bear Arms” Thing

From an ANJRPC alert, we have the text of the Attorney General’s brief in the lawsuit over New Jersey’s carry laws:

New Jerseyâ€™s carefully conceived and long-standing regulatory scheme is rooted in an appreciation that a permit to carry may not afford any measure of self-protection to a particular applicant and would instead increase the risk of the applicant being involved in “the known and serious dangers of misuse and accidental use.â€ When a handgun is carried in public, the serious risks and dangers of misuse and accidental use are borne by the public.

New Jersey has not merely a significant interest but a compelling interest in combating handgun violence and combating the dangers and risks associated with the accidental and misuse of handguns, which are inherent in carrying a handgun. It also has a compelling interest in reducing the use of handguns in crimes. A governmentâ€™s foremost function is to ensure the safety of all of its citizenry. When handguns are permitted to be carried beyond oneâ€™s home, the dangers and risks necessarily increase and are borne by the public.

Generally speaking, one cannot know whether crime against an individual will occur at all, much less know when, where, or how. Neither then can one know whether a handgun would provide an effective measure of self-defense and be safe to use as to other victims or bystanders. Further, the “needâ€ for a handgun for self-defense outside of the home does not stand alone. The carrying of a handgun inherently comes with the dangers and risks of its misuse or accidental use. These dangers and risks are borne by everyone with whom the person encounters.

That’s kind of funny, considering 40 or so other states seem to manage some kind of shall-issue policy without blood running in the streets. This would also seem to be the kind of policy argument, advocated by Justice Breyer, that the Heller and McDonald majorities rejected. In addition to this statement, she’s’ trying to get ANJRPC and SAF thrown off the lawsuit.

Wasted Money: Advertising Wine & Liquor in Pennsylvania

In the last week, I’ve had two wineries run ads that popped up for me on Facebook. Â Unfortunately, it’s another example of how government regulation leads to more waste in the economy. Â How is a Facebook ad an example of wasted money due to government intervention in the market? Â Stick with me here while I explain:

Victim 1: Elyse Winery
All wine sold in Pennsylvania is governed by bureaucrats at the PLCB. According to the law, we cannot even purchase it out-of-state and bring it back in. According to the PLCB’s website, there are exactly 3 bottles available to the entire state. Three freakin’ bottles for the entire state of Pennsylvania, and they are located about an hour from here. What are the chances I’m actually going to go try their product? I would have been open to trying a new wine if a liquor store near me carried it, or there were more than 3 bottles in the entire state. As it is, I just felt sorry for the winery owners who are wasting their precious cash advertising to Pennsylvania residents who can’t even buy their wines (unless they live near the store the bureaucrats have deemed “worthy” to carry the Elyse product).

Victim 2: Gracianna Winery
The bureaucrats at the PLCB have decided not to allow us taxpayers to sample any products made by Gracianna Winery. We cannot special order (at a minimum of 6 bottles, typically), nor can we find it for sale at any retail outlets.

Victim 3: Chambord Flavored Vodka
Black raspberry-flavored vodka sounds intriguing. I first heard about it via an advertisement on a SEPTA bus driving around this area. Unfortunately, none of state stores located near the bus route actually carry the product. Anyone driving behind it would need to travel to another town to actually purchase the product. What the hell is the use of advertising it if you can’t even buy it at any of the government-controlled stores near the bus route? It’s certainly a lot more waste for Chambord than the two winery ads.

We need state liquor/wine privatization now. I realize that these products aren’t likely to appear on the shelves of any stores that will open under a private system near me. However, with market forces, I can reward those private sellers who do carry an interesting variety of wines & liquors. I realize that technically I could special order more products through my local store, but since most of the state employees around here make it clear that you are unwelcome as a customer in their store, it’s not something I’m likely to try anytime soon. If a private store was run by a reasonably friendly staff, then I’d likely approach them with requests to try new products I see advertised. Then, those dollars wouldn’t be wasted.

In the meantime, the PLCB staffers have declared war on us. I look forward to even worse service and more obnoxious employees getting in the way of my attempts to buy wine & liquor. Fortunately, the GOP has indicated they will try to have a privatization bill passed in the House by Memorial Day. That will be something worth raising a glass to on the holiday weekend!

Doesn’t Add Up

ATF made a major bust, and like most bureaucrats looking for a larger budget, makes a nice display of some of the guns they supposedly captured. Is it just me or are there cans on some of those rifles? Where’d they come from? And is it just me, or does one of those look like it’s clicked into the full auto position on the receiver? And what’s with the Ma Deuce in the background? Did they buy that at a gun show or dealer too?

More pictures here. Definitely suppressors on those AKs. Another angle here. We really need to give news photographers lessons in how to take pictures of guns so experts can evaluate the evidence floated. Video here. Pretty clearly there’s equipment in this spread that’s not ordinary, and not available at your average gun dealer.

UPDATE: Tam points out in the comments that they are likely kinks with fake suppressors welded to the barrel to meet the overall length and barrel length requirement of the National Firearms Act. So fake suppressors are the rage among drug cartels these days?

UPDATE: More from Tam:

Theyâ€™re not paying retail for these things; theyâ€™re probably trading dope to somebody here in the states. I donâ€™t think they get too wound up over whether somethingâ€™s full auto or not. These guns arenâ€™t for firefights; theyâ€™re for ambushing opponents, intimidating locals, and shooting witnesses. Cyclic rate isnâ€™t all that important.

Also, not every foot soldier of the cartels gets an autorifle from el patron. In those pictures from that border shootout there were clearly a few thumbhole stocks.

The majority of the guns down there (at least once you get far enough from the border) are probably walking off army bases or coming up from South and Central America. But for us to claim that No Guns No How are coming from the US civilian market makes us look a bit naive.

UPDATE: I think Tam wins the internets on this thread. If you look at this picture, I’m pretty sure I recognize the Century Arms tags that come with the firearm, that they attach to the trigger guard.