Or they’ll lock you up, in Ohio.
Some days …
… there is just no pleasing everybody. I think next time I’ll just leave it at Happy Generic Holiday :)
Lessons on Body Armor
A lot of non-gun folks don’t have a good understanding of body armor. Too often you hear the term “bulletproof vest” bandied about, and that term is about the farthest from the truth as you can get. There is no such thing as a bullet proof vest, only bullet resistant vests, and how much resistance you get depends on exactly what the vest is rated for.
An intrepid blogger actually did some real world experiments on this, to see what would penetrate and what wouldn’t. The lowly .22 Magnum rimfire round fired from a rifle would seem to be enough to penetrate a level IIIA vest, which is considered sufficient to stop a .44 Magnum. This seems surprising, but not really; penetration is always a matter of being small and fast. I would like to see data on some other “pistol” rounds fired from rifles, to see what would happen there. What about some of these hot small bore rimfire rounds like .17 HMR or .17 HM2?
Kevlar vests have been a lifesaver for law enforcement, but they aren’t magic. They defend against the kind of threats cops are likely to encounter, but it’s important for folks to have an understanding of the technology, and its limitations.
Let’s Start a Pool
How long before Reasoned DiscourseTM commences? I’ll give it a few weeks.
UPDATE: In the comments, it would appear that Reasoned Discourse has already commenced, as comments there would appear to be moderated. That makes you wonder about this:
I came because of anger. But, I have stayed because of faith. A faith that tells me that love is stronger than hate. A faith in our cause that gives substance to our hopes for a safer society and makes us certain of realities we cannot see.
I would think someone that has faith in their cause wouldn’t be afraid of honest debate. You also have to love the implication that they are the side of love, and we are the side of hate.
The Police Can’t Be Everywhere
Once someone develops a pair of Heisenberg Compensators, I’m afraid we’re going to lose this line of argument.
Judicial Pay
There’s a movement to increase the pay of federal judges, currently being lead by Justice Roberts. I agree that we probably should be paying federal justices competitively. Here’s why:
The cost of not [addressing the pay disparity] will be a decrease in the quality of an increasingly important judiciary — and a change in its perspective. Fifty years ago, about 65 percent of the federal judiciary came from the private sector — from the practicing bar — and 35 percent from the public sector. Today 60 percent come from government jobs, less than 40 percent from private practice. This tends to produce a judiciary that is not only more important than ever but also is more of an extension of the bureaucracy than a check on it.
Absent competitive pay, the only reason someone has to take a federal judgeship is to power and prestige associated with the position, or a lack of ability in the private sector. That’s probably the type of person we don’t want sitting on the bench.
More Criticism of Alan Gura
Can be found here. [UPDATE 7/22/2010: Not anymore. The Las Vegas Review-Journal, sewer rats that they are, receive no links from this blog]  Hat tip to War on Guns for pointing it out. I don’t really agree with Suprynowicz, in the sense that I think Gura did what he thought he had to do to win the case, but I don’t find this article particularly inflamatory. What set me off on GOA was the implication that the people involved in this case were not on “our side.” I think there’s a difference between offering criticism and using language that tends to undermine or downplay the contributions of others.
This case won’t be the end of second amendment litigation by far, just the beginning. Will we rescue machine gun rights from this? I’m doubtful, there’s a lot of damage to be undone in that area, but we’ll have to wait and see what’s in the opinion, and where we can go from here. We will need groups that will make machine guns an issue, because it’s not going to be NRA carrying that torch. But we need these other groups to carry a message of “We’re standing up for machine gun owners.” Not a message of “We’re standing up for machine gun owners, and all these other people to our ‘shock and horror’, who are on ‘our side’ are undermining us.” This can’t become “If you don’t agree with me on everything we’re enemies.”  That’s a great way to lose.
Philadelphia Politicians Force Political Suicide
Apparently the politicians in Philadelphia want Obama and Hillary to take a stand:
Philadelphia’s Democratic leaders say they’ll press Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama to back stricter gun laws, despite the risk of angering voters throughout the rest of Pennsylvania and possibly damaging the party’s nominee in the general election.
Gun violence in Philadelphia — 331 homicides from gunfire in 2007 — thrust firearms laws to the top of the agenda for city voters, and they don’t care about the potential political pitfalls for the presidential candidates, said Carol Campbell, a Democratic ward leader in the city.
“If you can’t deal with it, then you’ve got a problem,” said Mrs. Campbell, who supports Mr. Obama and heads an alliance of black ward leaders.
So it’s not just the rest of Pennsylvania that has to pay because the Philadelphia politicians can’t control crime, the entire nation has to pay. I actually hope they do take a stand on this. That way gun owners across Pennsylvania won’t be fooled, and will be more likely to cross over and vote against these two.
On Non-Functional Firearms
It’s been a busy day over at HuffPo. Josh Horowitz of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence is apparently an expert on gun use for self-defense. So much so that he is apparently disturbed the justices take a skeptical view of his ilk dictating on the topic to others:
A quick look at the NRA’s Gun Safety Rules webpage reveals just how far out of the mainstream these justices are. One of the NRA’s “fundamental” rules for safe gun handling is “ALWAYS keep the gun unloaded until ready to use.” The NRA also tells gun owners to always “store guns so they are not accessible to unauthorized persons,” noting that “dozens of gun storage devices, as well as locking devices that attach directly to the gun, are available.” In a “Parents Guide to Gun Safety,” the NRA also points out the potential dangers to children, stating “a parent must, in every case, assess the exposure of the firearm and absolutely ensure that it is inaccessible to a child.”
Except that trigger locks are probably the worst way to ensure this. Few argue that firearms need to be kept away from young hands, but different solutions are optimal depending on the situation. This is a matter that ought to be left up to the individual, and not dictated by the state.
A New Constitutional Right?
Eugene Volokh posts a bit about Heller over at the HuffPo, taking some left-wing commentary to task for suggesting conservatives are engaging in judicial activism in finding a second amendment right.