Shall Not Be Questioned – Page 779 – The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State …

More on “The Rules”

I had one commenter, and Joe Huffman say they prefer the NRA’s rules more than Coopers. I have no beef with NRA’s rules. If you really try to pin me down, I’m really more in Tam’s “just don’t be stupid” camp. But given that people tend to communicate socially through the use of memes, both rule sets seem like they are well adapted to serve the purpose intended.

NRA’s rules have often been latched on to by our opponents, because they don’t consider a gun carried or kept nearby for self-defense to be “in use,” but I see that as a poor reason to reject them. I’m more interested in winning the mnemonic struggle for safety, so our opponents don’t get to use the stupid against us. I’m not really too concerned with what accomplishes that, as long as the right ideas get across.

They Don’t Always Get it Right

NRA does not always get grades and endorsements correct. There are few state liaisons that don’t have more than one state, and the number of races to keep track of is in the hundreds. I’ve said before, there’s value in having a working relationship with the local people if it’s a topic you’re really concerned about — and the movement needs people who are concerned about it. That’s manifested itself this election more than others.

The late-in-the-season Castle Doctrine fight has complicated things. NRA has the problem of not only having a key vote that we’d like to consider heading into this November election, but the additional problem of magazines and endorsements needing to go out, and having all of its state legislative resources being focused on ensuring eventual victory on this issue.

That’s lead to me bringing into question some grades this particular election season. These are issues I am raising privately with them, and it’s probably best to do it that way, so I won’t go into details about particular races where I think they got it wrong. My greater point is, if you think they got it wrong, to raise the issue, and have some concrete things to point to as to why you might thing a grade is in error.

One race I can speak about, which illustrates the problem with late legislative fights, is that of endorsements. We just got our magazine, which has our local State Senator Robert “Tommy” Tomlinson listed as an A and endorsed. If you look on the web site, he’s listed as a B+, and carrying no NRA endorsement. The web site reflects the fact that Tomlinson voted to amend the Castle Doctrine bill with an amendment that would weaken LTC reciprocity by removing the ability of Pennsylvania residents to carry firearms on a permit recognized as valid by the commonwealth.

I’m glad NRA dinged Tomlinson for it. He’s been good on our issue in the past, but decided to drift on this matter. It’s a shame, however, that the magazine isn’t going to reflect that. I think that’s probably good, longer term, because it’ll give Senator Tomlinson a chance to talk to some of us about the issue, and hopefully make amends. It’s worth noting the Democrat running against Tomlinson is F rated, and no friend at all. I’m not willing write off Tomlinson yet, but in my role as volunteer coordinator, I’m going to be spending my resources on other races this election year.

UPDATE: I’m pleased to report that in regards to the local race in question, the error has acknowledged, and corrective action has been taken. Far too often people paint this stuff as some kind of conspiracy to sell out gun owners, when in reality sometimes it’s just an honest oversight. If you had hundreds of races to think about every two years, you’d probably misjudge a few of them too. That’s why NRA needs local people paying attention.

Why Does Liberty Lose?

It’s a question I’ve wondered about for a while, but never really had a good answer for. A lot of people say they want smaller government, and more freedom, but that never seems to translate into the people in power making that happen. Why? I didn’t really understand it until I started involving myself in local politics through NRA’s electoral apparatus. I am definitely more of an observer more than a major player, in most things, and that’s true of my involvement in this endeavor as well. I am relatively uninterested in the elbow rubbing, social, or even civic aspects of political involvement, so much as figuring out the game and coming up with strategies to beat it. While I’ve learned a few things in this regard, the big thing I’ve learned is that the game is eminently beatable, and what prevents it from happening is a lack of players willing to participate in the game.

SayUncle linked yesterday to an article that sort of hints at what the problem is, though the author is a lot angrier than I am. The problem, essentially, is that there’s been no political constituency for liberty. Note that there’s a difference between a constituency, which is a lot of people saying they want more of it, and a political constituency, which are people saying they want liberty, and who are building a political structure to accomplish it. The Tea Party, right now, is mostly a constituency, but who is showing early signs of evolving into a political constituency.

I say evolving, because whether the Tea Party movement is for real, or a flash in the pan, depends entirely on what happens on November 2nd, and a lot more on what happens after. This is not because we’re about to elect the saviors of our Republic, and can happily go back to sleep, knowing the GOP will take care of the problem. That’s what happened in 1994, and the GOP took care of jack.Â But this year is somewhat different.Â 1994 did not have the levels of grassroots anger we’ve seen manifested through the Tea Party movement. This is something truly new. New and familiar or not, I’m not optimistic that a movement based purely on grassroots anger will stay angry long enough to seriously change the political dynamic. The question, after November 2nd, is whether or not the Tea Party movement will merely remain a vessel of grassroots anger, or will evolve into a political constituency.

What does a political constituency look like?Â Well, first and foremost, it creates a structure to enable the two fundamentals of electoral politics, money and votes. If you don’t wield either of those two things, you can’t change anything. The Tea Party movement has shown it can turn its anger into fundraising, and we’ll see how well it turns it into votes, but Tea Party victories are going to energize the left eventually, and a lot of newly elected politicians are going to disappoint us. What happens when the anger goes away? What happens when people who support smaller government decide things are getting better? To me that’s the real question. Can the Tea Party maintain positive momentum toward liberty even when times are better? If the answer is yes, this might be a game changer.

One thing that’s particularly bothered me about liberty loving people is how hard they think it is to change things — like a finger of lightning came down from the heavens and etched the New Deal, forever unalterable, in stone. Having participated in several elections now in the role of a volunteer coordinator, the one thing I’ve been struck with is how little it would take to fundamentally alter the political dynamic in this county. The number of people with serious influence over your local political apparatuses is actually quite small, and a lot of those individuals with influence honestly don’t bring much to the table (in either money, votes, or good ideas). If you had twenty motivated individuals rally around a liberty related issue, who were willing to give a little bit of time, or who could raise money, you would have a serious effects on the politics in your county. Whether it’s a Democratic or Republican district wouldn’t matter a whole hell of a lot, it would just be a matter of adjusting your tactics and expectations based on what you had to work with. All politics is local, when you get down to it. Multiply that across every county in the country, and suddenly things start to look a lot different nationwide.

So why hasn’t it happened for liberty issues? Because most people who have a strong understanding of what liberty is have better things to do. I don’t say that with any condescension. I can think, off the top of my head, about two dozen things I’d rather do than volunteer for an election, and at least as many things I’d rather spend my money on than political donations. I’d rather rub elbows with a dog than most politicians. It comes down to what you really value, and I’m not going to bemoan anyone’s choices there. But whether the truth hurts or not, people who love liberty haven’t put enough value on it to do what it takes to make a political constituency for it. That’s why Liberty loses.

Fighting Over Us

Kind of like the guys fighting over the pretty chick at the prom. No doubt some folks in Fairfax are probably annoyed with this kind of stuff, but it’s a good situation to be in if you look at the bigger picture.

Man v. Snake v. Government Bureaucracies

Man wins, at least against the snake. Pit viper bites can be really nasty, and it sounds like Dave got hit by a big one. Rattlesnake venom is hemotoxic, meaning it destroys tissue. This makes a bite from a members of the pit viper family extremely painful, and visibly damaging to the surrounding area. In high enough doses it’s lethal. It looks like reasonably prompt treatment with antivenin managed to save his life.Â While I think we all can agree getting bitten by a snake is a remarkably bad run of luck, the specific type of snake here, the pit viper, is responsible for enough bites of man and beast each year to create a viable market for antivenin, and overcome the hurdles the FDA throws at people making the stuff.

To understand that, you have to understand a bit about antivenin. What is generally done is to inject snake venom into a horse, which causes the horse to produce antibodies against the venom. Those antibodies can be separated from the horse’s blood, purified, preserved, and eventually injected into the victim of a snake bite. The horse antibodies then go to work neutralizing the venom. It sounds great, and it is. The only problem is, there are a significant number of people who are allergic to equine proteins, and who will go into anaphylactic shock as a result of the treatments, never mind the snake bite.

So clearly if you’re dying of a snakebite, we can’t take the risk that you might be allergic to the antivenin. Better that you die of the snake bite, lest anyone blame an FDA bureaucrat for approving it. Fortunately for Dave, the FDA has approved an antivenin for pit viper bites that’s sourced from sheep, rather than horses, which fewer people are allergic to. Enough people and animals get bitten by pit vipers each year to make it economical. But what if you get bit by something else?

Something else, like a Coral Snake. Coral Snake have a venom is a neurotoxic, meaning it attacks the nervous system. The victim of a Coral Snake bite might not feel much in the way of pain, not have limbs bloody and blow up like balloons. In that sense, a bite from the Coral Snake is not as dramatic as bites from species that produce hemotoxic venom. But the victim does stand a very good chance, untreated, of dropping dead a few hours later from respiratory and cardiac arrest, as the venom goes to work on the central nervous system. If you happen to be unlucky enough to get bitten by a Coral Snake, which fortunately are rare, since they are not an aggressive species, you’re pretty much shit out of luck. Why? Well, the last US stocks of existing equine derived Coral Snake antivenin are scheduled to expire, right about now actually. The market for antivenin for that species is too small for there to be an incentive for a pharmaceutical maker to get it approved by the FDA. There are stocks in other countries, like Mexico, but they aren’t of a variety that is approved by the FDA, and no one wants to pay for the studies to prove it’s safe. Like I said, better to let you die of the snake bite.

So there you have it. If you get bit by a snake, make sure it’s from a species our government protectors have deemed we may be saved from, or get bit in Mexico. This chapter in government regulation was brought to you by the letter “H” and “C.”

Four Rules: Kind of Like Religion

Alan over at Snarkybytes takes issue with the four rules. I tend to think of the rules as being a construct to help people understand safe gun handling, more than literal commandments that must be taken at their very word. In that sense it’s kind of like religion — if you get all fundamentalist with it, it loses its point.

We know that there is, of course, such a thing as an unloaded gun. Cooper’s point is more that we should not assume a gun is safe just because we’re certain it’s unloaded. More than a few people have been killed by guns that someone was certain wasn’t loaded. That’s the problem rule one is meant to solve. I’m not sure how concerned we should be about how we accomplish cleaning, dry firing, and smithingÂ conceptually within the framework of rule one, because that seems to be missing the forest for the trees. That ends up getting into debates that go something like, “Well, if you take the slide off, and remove the barrel, is it still really a gun you have to treat as loaded? I mean, if I’m staring down a barrel out of the firearm, how is it different than staring down a pluming pipe?” All reasonable technical observations, and interesting in an academic sort of way, but I’m not sure we need to argue about such things when thinking about promoting safe gun handling.

I tend to think the four rules are fine, but I think they have to be taken for what they are; a conceptual framework for safe gun handling. One could certainly make literal arguments for why they do or don’t apply in this situation or that situation, and where they fall apart if taken literally, but to me that’s in the realm of an academic exercise. I think in terms of promoting safe gun handling, they’ve suited the community just fine.

Little People May Lose their Representative

I’ll never forget the day I walked around the corner of a House office building and nearly had a man run into my chest. Now, I’ll grant you that the man really isn’t that short, but with my height and normal work heels, it would have made things a little awkward if we actually collided. That man was Dennis Kucinich.

So, imagine my surprise when the political folks on my Twitter feed start talking about how he’s polling surprisingly close to his GOP opponent. And now, according to FatWhiteMan, we find out the opponent is pro-gun.

Sorry to the little folks out there, but I’m going to back the man who will vote for gun rights instead. But, if it makes you feel any better, you still have Barbara Boxer who is so short that she has to stand on a box to be seen behind podiums. Although, Carly Fiorna may also take care of her this year – another candidate running on a pro-Second Amendment platform. Beyond those two, I’m not sure who the next shortest Representative/Senator is or will be next year. Carly still isn’t tall, based on what I’ve read she’s only 6 inches taller than Boxer, and that would put her at 5’5″.

This also begs the question: why are the smallest people in the House & Senate the most anti-gun? It would seem they should see value in having access to tools with which to defend themselves.

Meat is Wrong

Don’t worry, I haven’t turned vegetarian & crazy animal rights activist on you. Apparently, a pop star wore a “dress” made of meat to an awards show recently, and there’s now interest by young women who want to wear one for their Halloween costumes. The folks at NJ.com sent someone with a video camera around to various butchers so people would find out just why it’s a generally bad idea to wear a dress of raw meat.

Jersey butchers warn against wearing a Lady Gaga meat dress for Halloween

They found one woman willing to go on camera admitting to trying to recreate the look, but at least she came to her senses when she realized that if she covered herself in bacon, she could end up naked by the end of the night. (Of course, the way that most women’s Halloween costumes turn out, she’ll probably end up naked by the end of the night even if she doesn’t wear bacon.) (Link stolen from Jim Braaten.)

Just Like Floppy Disk Drives …

… floppy holsters suck. I can’t tell you how many holsters I went through before figuring out you get what you pay for. I only have two I use regularly, a leather pocket holster for a Kel-Tec P3AT, and a kydex Comp-TacÂ Infidel for a Glock 19.

I also own, and for two years carried a Sidearmor IWB holster. Both the Comp-Tac and Sidearmor are good holsters, and each have advantages and disadvantages. It really depends on the trade-offs you want to make. The Comp-Tac’s clip makes it easy to take off the gun in the holster at the end of the day, which is a much safer way to handle. My Glock only leaves the holster if it’s being shot, cleaned, or going into the safe for a while. Other than that, I leave it loaded, in the holster. The disadvantage of Comp-Tac’s easy to remove clip isÂ it’s also easy for the gun to work its way of the belt and dump onto the floor. I had this happen to me once, fortunately in a situation where it wasn’t a problem. With the Comp-Tac clip, I’ve found it’s very important to wear the correct size and girth of belt. If you pay attention to how well a belt secures and carries the gun, you shouldn’t have a problem. With the Comp-Tac, you need to select a belt around the holster, not the other way around.

The Sidearmor holster has more belt attachment options, for making the holster work with a wider variety of belts. Once worn, it provides a very stable fit, even on some thinner belts that could never hold Comp-Tac’s infidel line well. The downside is theirÂ belt attachment options make it impossible to take the gun off in the holster without removing your belt. Even the J-hook option is difficult to remove without at least undoing the belt and loosening. The attachment pieces will also break about once a year and will need to be replaced, in my experience. Overall it’s a solid platform, it just depends on what’s important to you.

Ultimately I’ve opted to favor ease of gun removal, lest Bitter think I’m getting frisky if I come in from a night out and start undoing my belt, when all I was doing was trying to remove the Glock.

Why We Win

Chicks dig the black magic.