We all know Boston was looking at doing voluntary random searches, but according to Bruce they aren’t above doing involuntary random searches either.
Insurance Companies Suck
SayUncle tells about a local angry gun guy (there are a lot of them) and a new local range that’s being opened. A lot of the dumb rules you see at ranges and clubs are stipulated by insurance policies. Insurance companies are in the business of insuring against risk, but because they are also in the business of making money, they prefer that they never have to pay out on the risk they are insuring against, so you get dumb rules. You can, of course, pay for better insurance, which some ranges do, but it costs more, which gets passed onto the consumer.
My club doesn’t allow you to bring a firearm onto club property to shoot unless it’s unloaded and cased. For concealed carry, I was told if they don’t see it, it’s not a problem, but you can’t shoot or show your carry piece, unless the shit has hit the fan. The local indoor range allows shooting carry pieces, even from the holster, but it’s $20 an hour to shoot there, and yearly memberships are $200.
I really do have to wonder what actuarial evidence insurance companies have that certain types of gun related activities are risky while others aren’t. Firearms accidents at clubs and ranges aren’t exactly common. I’ve heard of suicides happening at ranges that rent guns, but are accidents really so common you can determine which types of activities are more dangerous than others? I’m skeptical that insurance companies can really prove an articulable danger with some activities they try to limit at ranges. I suspect it’s probably more along the lines of “That sounds dangerous, so we think we can get away with charging more if you want your policy to cover that.”
Nonetheless, we shouldn’t blame ranges for the failing of their insurers. Maybe once Gunny gets his range stable and profitable, he’ll be able to afford a policy that lets his patrons shoot their carry guns.
New Jersey Threatning FFL Distributor
Not content to close nearly all the gun shops in New Jersey with burdensome regulations, and generally assholery on the part of the state, they’ve now set their sights on Sarco, Inc, which is a large firearms distributor. This is something that could effect commerce in firearms everywhere else, which is no doubt fine by New Jersey state officials.
Using the Militia
Dave Hardy tells of a story that harkens back to how the militia used to be used, which is a supplement to law enforcement. I think programs like this are a good thing. A citizenry that’s playing a more active role in the safety of their own communities is far better than one which expects the government to do everything for them.
When the Laws Don’t Work
Shout as loud as you can for more of the same. That’s the Chicago Way!
Suppressor Prosecution
Dave Hardy points out and article that talks about how most prosecutions involving supressors are for simple possession, and not associated with any particular crime.
Obama’s Record Not in Question
Obama distanced himself from his record on guns by claiming that his staff had answered questions where he called for banning handguns and semi-automatic firearms. It turns out he was lying:
Late last year, in response to a Politico story about Obama’s answers to the original questionnaire, his aides said he “never saw or approved†the questionnaire.
They asserted the responses were filled out by a campaign aide who “unintentionally mischaracterize[d] his position.â€
But a Politico examination determined that Obama was actually interviewed about the issues on the questionnaire by the liberal Chicago nonprofit group that issued it. And it found that Obama — the day after sitting for the interview — filed an amended version of the questionnaire, which appears to contain Obama’s own handwritten notes added to one answer.
I’m sorry, did I say he lied? Pretty clearly he just misspoke. Yeah. That’s the ticket.
HB 1845 Considered – One Amendment Withdrawn
According to today’s session report for the Pennsylvania General Assembly, Representative Levdansky has withdrawn one amendment, A06178, from consideration. Should be noted that this is not the “Lost and Stolen” amendment, but one relating to the original bill, that has to do with altered obliterated serial numbers. Doesn’t say anything about whether “Lost and Stolen” was considered today, though it was supposed to be on the agenda. I’ll let folks know when I know more.
What happened can be described in this AP article. My information was incorrect:
Rep. Bryan Cutler, R-Lancaster, withdrew from the House floor a pending constitutional challenge to legislation that would require owners to report within 72 hours when they realize a handgun has been lost or stolen. Cutler said he would withdraw the constitutional question because of House scheduling needs, but intended to renew it whenever the gun measure comes back before the chamber, perhaps as early as Tuesday.
Sorry folks, I try to be more reliable, but it was hard to tell from the state’s web site exactly what was going on.
UPDATE: The vote on all this is apparently going to be on Wednesday. It’s looking good, but we need to keep the pressure on.
One Week
One week from today is April 7th, which is when gun owners from across Pennsylvania will be going to Harrisburg to lobby our elected officials so that we may defeat the gun control measures before the legislature, and promote our own bills.
I will be attending myself, and hope you can come too.
LiveLeak Grows a Pair
Good to see they are standing up for free speech.