Normally I condemn laws that require banks to spy on customers. But applied to Elliot Spitzer, I consider them poetic justice. No doubt as a prosecutor, he relied on many of these laws to send people up river. Paybacks are hell.
Category: Politics
First Amendment Issue in Pennsylvania
Thanks to Rustmeister, who found it, it would appear that a Pennsylvania school is stifling student free speech:
Donald Miller III, 14, went to Penn Manor High School in December wearing a T-shirt he said was intended to honor his uncle, a U.S. Army soldier fighting in Iraq.
The shirt bears the image of a military sidearm and on the front pocket says “Volunteer Homeland Security.” On the back, over another image of the weapon, are the words “Special issue Resident Lifetime License — United States Terrorist Hunting Permit — Permit No. 91101 — Gun Owner — No Bag Limit.”
If I recall my first amendment law correct, which I might not, it’s lawful for schools to regulate dress code, but it has to do it in a content neutral manner. In other words, it could proscribe all shirts that are not plain shirts of uniform color, it could proscribe an obscene t-shirt that could be construed as disruptive to the educational environment, but it can’t discriminate on dress based merely on disapproval of the content displayed on the shirt.
Feds Chilling Free Speech Online?
Looks like it to me. I might not always agree with David’s approach to activism, but to suggest that he’s implicitly threatened anyone, or that his blogging activities might bring the wrath of federal law enforcement on him is offensive to not only the first amendment, but the very principles this country was founded on.
We’ll All Be Open Carrying Soon Enough
One of the things that has made me a bigger advocate of Open Carry than I have been in the past is that technology is making concealment harder and harder.
You can count on societies moving toward democratic totalitarianism to develop technologies such as this, but in some ways it’s inevitable. It will be possible in the future to have near perfect enforcement of some laws. We have to argue what kind of laws we are willing to live under.
On Endorsing McCain
Bruce of No Looking Backwards says:
I’ve come to terms with the fact that Fred Thompson is not going to be the next President of the United States. I am, hereby, officially endorsing the candidacy of John McCain for President.
Granted, he is far from being the “perfect candidate”.
Then again, no such man or woman exists. And, if they do, they likely possess the common sense that would compel them to avoid running for president.
I’d say I’m about 70% in agreement with McCain on the issues. But that number drops to approximately zero when looking at what the Democrats will have to offer us this fall. I see it as a choice between a D-student and someone who never bothered to show up for class.
I have not decided yet whether to actively shill for McCain, or just beat up on his opponents mercilessly. I’m still of the opinion that McCain is far far better than either of those two, and on my big area of disagreement with him, campaign finance reform, he can probably do less further damage as president than he can remaining a senator.
Scott Bach Hits Back
Scott Bash, President of The Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs, and NRA Board Member, hits back at Bryan Miller on why New Jersey should not be throwing otherwise law abiding gun owners in prison for ten years because they are unknowingly in possession of an assault firearm.
ATF Whistleblower Controversy
Dave Hardy has some interesting commentary.
The Myth Continues
Hot on the heels of blaming Pennsylvania for New Jersey’s violence problems, Bryan Miller has decided to turn his attention back to more comfortable pursuits of sticking it to gun owners in his home state.
He continues to peddle the myth that some semi-automatic firearms are more dangerous than other semi-automatic firearms, and pushing to increase penalties for possession in The Garden State:
The enactment of NJ’s Assault Weapons Ban was the subject of enormous public attention, as the gun lobby fought it tooth and nail and subsequently sought to repeal it (remember Governor Florio blowing a watermelon apart?). Claiming ignorance of the illegality of possession of an assault weapon is disingenuous and dangerous.
In fact, any “otherwise law-abiding” assault weapon owner would either have had to obtained his/her gun prior to 1991, purposely avoided the grace period and kept it illegally for 16 years or purchased it out-of-state since 1991 and illegally brought it here. Yet, Bach and his organization believe such illegal, cavalier and menacing behavior merits the equivalent of a ‘Get Out of Jail Free’ card.
Ridiculous.
Remember what an assault weapons in New Jersey can look like. If you had one of these in your closet for the past 30 years, would you think you were in possession of an illegal weapon that could get you 10 years in the pokey? You’d almost think Bryan thought it audacious that residents of The Garden State were under this mistaken notion they lived in a free country with a right to bear arms provision in its constitution. This isn’t gun nut fantasy. People in New Jersey can and [UPDATE 7/22/2010: What follows was a link that has been removed, due to the anti-blogger frivolous lawsuits prosecuted by Las Vegas Review-Yellow-Journal] have been arrested and jailed for possessing of of these:
[Below is an brief quote that appeared in the Las Vegas Review-Yellow-Journal about the NJ Supreme Court statement that, ‘When it comes to firearms, the citizen acts at his own peril.’ when a New Jersey citizen went to jail for possessing a Marlin Model 60, a common .22 caliber rifle. I have removed the passage because I do not link to or promote rat weasels like the Las Vegas Review-Journal.]
I have to assume that’s just fine by Mr. Miller. One more gun owner in jail where they belong, right? If that’s not really what his sentiment, then he wouldn’t have any problem passing a rimfire exception to the New Jersey ban now would he? Don’t think so? I don’t either.
There Will Always Be a Bridge
Bryan Miller is once again blaming Pennsylvania for crime in New Jersey:
This one-way traffic in illegal guns is even clearer and more damaging in Camden, connected to Philadelphia by two major bridges, as a greater portion of its crime guns come from PA than is the case for the rest of NJ. According to Camden County Acting Prosecutor Joshua Ottenberg, 25% of crime guns recovered in Camden in 2006 came from PA. He said: “Any town that has a bridge is obviously going to feel more of an impact…” So, Delaware River towns, Camden and Trenton, each only a bridge ride away from PA and its vibrant illegal gun market, suffer disproportionately.
New Jersey has effectively extinguished lawful gun ownership. Only about 12% of households owned guns in The Garden State. Only Hawaii, which never had much of a shooting tradition, has a lower percentage of household firearms ownership. Pennsylvania’s household firearms ownership rate is much higher, at 35%. A fairly sizable portion of shooters at my gun club are from New Jersey. They come here, because there just aren’t many places to shoot over on their side of the river anymore. The past several decades has seen range after range, club after club, and gun shop after gun shop, close its doors and fold up, and more and more people chose to either leave the state, or give up gun ownership, rather than face the sea of regulations, and the risk that screwing up could land you very serious time in prison.
There’s very little doubt that criminals will follow the path of least resistance when it comes to acquiring firearms, and it’s easier to smuggle them from other jurisdictions than it is to start making firearms in garages and basements. I don’t dispute this. What I do dispute is that creating restrictive laws elsewhere is going to have an effect on anything other than trafficking patterns. Even if you outlawed them nationwide, there will always be a bridge, and it’s not hard to manufacture firearms to begin with, even in a war zone like Chechnya. The real question isn’t whether gun control affects trafficking patterns, but whether it effects crime, and there’s never been any conclusive evidence that it does. Let’s take a look at crime rates between New Jersey and Pennsylvania:
Traditionally, New Jersey has had a much higher violent crime rate than Pennsylvania, and it’s only been since New York’s revival that New Jersey’s crime rate has dropped significantly. This makes sense, because as much as criminals cross borders to commit the crime of smuggling firearms, they also cross borders to commit violent crimes. New Jersey’s crime would no doubt be even lower if Philadelphia could get its act together, since New Jersey has no large cities of its own. Many of its smaller cities are among the most violent in the nation. Far worse than Philadelphia itself. Bryan can argue all he wants that Pennsylvania needs to “destroy the village in order to save it” in regards to our shooting heritage, but there will always be a bridge. Criminals will find ways to get guns, and it’s not going to do much to lower crime.
Penalty Increase in New Jersey
The State of New Jersey is considering increasing the penalty for possession of an “assault firearm” from a third degree crime to a second degree crime, which carries a penalty of up to ten years in prison and a $150,000 fine. Before anyone in New Jersey suggests “Well, it’s the law and you should obey it!” consider that this is considered an assault firearm in the State of New Jersey:
 
Clearly any New Jersey gun owner who happens to be an unbeknowing lawbreaker, and possesses one of these high powered .22 caliber machines of death, they deserve 10 years in the pokey!