Shall Not Be Questioned – Page 95 – The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State …

Man Bites Dog: New York Times Comes Out Against Gravity Knife Ban

This is honestly something I’d never thought I’d see:

But the modern knives sold in countless stores bear little resemblance to the knives that were the original subjects of the ban.Â Many people, including carpenters, construction workers and stagehands, have no idea that their knives can be made to open with a flick of a wrist â€” a skill many New York police officers have developed. Most donâ€™t know that simply possessing such a knife breaks the law.

The article goes on to note that a law office that handles such cases for defendents charged under this law says of the 254 of its clients, only four were charged with intent to use it unlawfully. How much do you want to bet of those four, they were arguable self-defense cases?

If even the New York Times agrees, it’s time for this stupid law to go. This is a good time to remind folks that Knife Rights is doing good work, and succeeding even in places no one would have argued success was achievable. But the fact is that gun rights today have far greater protections than those who choose to carry knives even for reasons unrelated to self-defense.

Begun, These Ice Cream Wars Have

When Sebastian was telling me the tales of different types of ice cream trucks he had available to him growing up based on whether he was at home or visiting an aunt or grandmother, I joked that there were ice cream truck turf wars that kept those boundaries in line.

I was joking because in America the idea that one would get violent over ice cream – especially when trucks often sell different types of ice cream novelties and cones – is just completely absurd. It’s insane.

But, apparently, the NYT reports that it’s the typical business model in New York City. It started out with trademark infringement that resulted in more than $765,000 in legal awards (that haven’t been paid by the offender), but then it elevated to surrounding competing trucks and beating on them. A driver for New York Ice Cream, the offending company, admits that they get physical with other drivers in an effort to enforce “turf” illegally. There’s apparently a decades-long history of violence among other companies, too. One driver in 1969 was kidnapped and had his truck blown up. More recently, a couple was beaten to critical condition with a wrench.

Talk about New York Values. It’s amazing that the city wants to leave the victims unable to defend themselves. Well, it’s not shocking since we’re not talking about America here.

EPIX Pulling Fraudulent “Under the Gun?”

Bearing Arms is reporting the EPIX is showing the video isÂ no longer available. Here’s hoping this isn’t just a technical glitch. Couric earlier expressed “regret” for the editing, but didn’t offer an apology or to make things right by re-editing that segment. That tells me she’s looking to let off some of the pressure on her, which is honestly the time to dump even more on her. No quarter. Sadly Couric doesn’t have much of a career left to destroy, but I don’t see any reason to let off the pressure for her fraud.

Weekly Gun News – Edition 38

Back from the long weekend with lots o’ tabs that need a clearin’.

Apparently HBO is also doctoring interviews a ‘la Katie Couric. Starve the beast! Cut the cord!

The Onion couldn’t have come up with a better parody of the ridiculousness of British attitudes on weapons.

Charles C.W. Cooke is asking the left if Trump’s rise is giving them second thoughts about this gun control thing. It ought to.

Their ultimate goal with expanding prohibited persons: Man denied gun permit in NJ because of his bad driving record.

Gavin Newsom is finding out gun rights isn’t just an old fat white guy issue anymore.

Big Commonwealth Court decision on the privacy of LTCF records.

One of the architects of the SAFE Act convicted of corruption.

I’m not sure I’d go so far as to say this represents “trashing the Second Amendment,” but the Libertarian Party always seemed to be more of a debating society than a political movement.

I’m glad to see NRA denying media creds to outfits known to be hostile. The Louisville Eccentric Observer wrote a bunch of anti-NRA articles, with one talking about they wish the NRA would just disappear. After the convention theyÂ whine about not getting media creds. Smallest violin fellas, playing right here. All we ask for is a fair shake.

Joe Huffman: “Anti-gun people should voteÂ againstÂ Hillary to keep guns out of the hands of the American people.”

Joe also catches the Asbury Park Press in a moment of hypocrisy.

Our opponents are focusing on suicide prevention, and tugging on heart strings. Last night down at my local train station, about a mile from my house, a man threw himself in front of an oncoming freight train and quite effectively killed himself. This is becoming a bit of an epidemic around here, but you don’t see people blaming CSX and Amtrak. More ground prep for gun control from Vogue here.

Does anyone still watch The Daily Show?

Still trying to work out a deal to allow Sunday hunting in Pennsylvania.

Yahoo is doing its part to help get a Dem in the White House this fall: “Trump’s Gun Views in Spotlight Amid String of Accidental School Shootings.” If you say so.

Black Guns Matter!

Chicago Tribune writer Charles Madigan buys an NRA membership and thinks he’s infiltrated the organization. What a tool. I’m wondering if he’s related in some way to Lisa Madigan, Illinois Attorney General.

Background check battle at PA state capitol. We already have background checks for handguns in PA. Long guns are very rarely used in crime, and the background check law doesn’t do much to keep gang members in Philly from shooting each other. But hey, lets double down on failure.

Eugene Volokh: “Trumpâ€™s potential Supreme Court justice list is actually very good”

It would seem repealing PLCAA has become a real goal of the gun control movement under Bloomberg.

Dave Kopel has an excellent backgrounder on the PLCAA and why it was necessary to pass it.

No, next question. “Should Pennsylvania require every firearm to be a ‘smart gun’? The fact that this question is even being asked is why there won’t be any smart guns on the market. There’s enough people out there clearly signaling their intention to make them mandatory, we’ll destroy any manufacturer that produces one.

John Richardson found that the NRA Trump endorsementÂ is actually pretty controversial based on an article he wrote. I fully expected they would endorse Trump, so it wasn’t a surprise to me. All that’s going to matter to them is having say on who gets to replace Scalia and any other future justice, and his list was pretty good.

Gunpocalypse continuing in California. I fear for California, der Krieg ist verloren. We’re only saving that state through exercising federal power under the 14th Amendment. Hang tight and hope the calvary comes.

OK, I’m starting to wonder if Townhall/Bearing Arms has an advertising agreement with SIG :) We are a house divided ourselves. Bitter is a SIG gal, whereas I am a Glock dude.

Thirdpower: “The only times â€˜gun controlâ€™ can win is when they dump millions of dollars into it and lie to the public.” Yeah, basically.

DC Circuit Court of Appeals suspends order requiring DC to issue permits. You might be about to find out the cost of Obama stocking the DC circuit with as many judges as he has.

Pennsylvania Firearms Law Seminar to be held on August 6th.

Miguel: “Apparently the Brady Campaign does not read the news.”

Something Must Be Done!

“Something must be done,” is the first step in the political process. Shouted by ignorant voters, who find some problem they don’t like. Not even considering complexity, nuance, grey areas, or unintended consequences, this low-information sentiment isÂ latched on to by politicians eager to assert their power: “This is something, so therefore it must be done!”

It is in this vein that the Sun Heard says, “Enough is enough, we must get guns under control!” The article starts off with examples of a criminal element out of control, and inevitably arrives here:

We don’t want to take firearms from responsible gun owners, but it’s hard to imagine any of these people fit that description.

Ah yes, it’s just that easy. The central premise of gun control is that criminals obey gun control laws. If only we had this law or that, none of these bad things would happen. If this were so, California would be a crime free paradise, rather than having a violent crime rate higher than the national average, and higher than it’s neighboring states that lack California’s strict gun control laws:

“What is alarming to the police is that they have no power to ascertain the potential criminal background of an armed individual until a crime is committed, and by then it is too late,” said Ladd Everitt, spokesman for the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, an advocacy group.

That’s typically how it works Ladd, even with permits, because the police can’t stop someone without reasonable suspicion the person is committing a crime. That’s the law. There is no earthly reason in this day in age when police have laptops in their cruisers, that theyÂ can’t determine whether someone is eligible to possess a firearm in a few minutes, if it comes to an actual stop. Permits are entirely unnecessary.

Wishing Everyone a Nice Holiday Weekend

I’ve never liked saying Happy Memorial Day, but I do hope you all get to enjoy some time with family and friends. Summer here officially started (weather wise) Thursday. I guess we don’t get a spring. But there are upsides:

BBQ Memorial Day Weekend 2016

It’s hard to find good Q up here in yankeeland, so I have to make it myself. An 8lb Boston Butt for pulled pork either tonight or tomorrow (depending on when it gets finished), and some armadillo eggs to tide us over until the butt is ready.

How to Play the Game

Phil Van Cleave made the very sensible decision make his own recording of his entire interview with Katie Couric. That should be a lesson to all of us who might find themselves in a position to deal with the media. If VCDL hadn’t done their own recording, Couric would have simply denied that they manipulated anything, and that would have been that. Who are you going to believe? The crazy gun nuts?

This story got legs because VCDL knew better than to trust the media. None of us should. I’ve been ignoring requests from media for years. I just won’t talk to them. Now this story has some real legs because there was proof. Hell, even NPR agrees she was out of line. The only sad part about all this is that, unlike Dan Rather or Brian Williams, Couric honestly doesn’t have much of a career left to destroy. She’s never been a journalist. She’s a propagandist.

Our Opponents Are Still Bullshit Artists

Looks like Katie Couric was caught using Daily Show tactics to make gun rights advocates look like clueless slobs.

â€œKatie Couric asked a key question during an interview of some members of our organization,â€ he said. â€œShe then intentionally removed their answers and spliced in nine seconds of some prior video of our members sitting quietly and not responding. Viewers are left with the misunderstanding that the members had no answer to her question.â€

I’m shocked! PJ Media has more to say about it here, noting:

The documentary’s director, Stephanie Soechtig, said in a statement: â€œI never intended to make anyone look bad and I apologize if anyone felt that way.â€ Of course not.

Yeah, I don’t believe that for a minute. Couric is no better than Dan Rather or Brian Williams. There is no integrity left in journalism anymore. The fact that they did this begs the question of how often they do this to others?

UPDATE from Bitter: Last night NPR reported on this controversy and said flatly:

“This manipulation â€” and that’s what it was â€” would not pass muster at NPR under its principles for fairness in handling interviews.”

This is getting real traction across many, many outlets. And they are frequently laying the blame at the feet of Katie Couric. From NPR:

“The deception reflects poorly on Couric, too. She conducted the interviews, serves as the movie’s executive producer and has promoted it extensively. She saw a polished cut of the documentary before its release.”

Third Circuit: No 2A Right to Machine Guns

This decision was released right before I left for Louisville. The Third Circuit contains Pennsylvania, Delaware and New Jersey, and has not, in general, been a very Second Amendment friendly circuit.

Heller and subsequent decisions in our Court make clear that the de facto ban on machine guns found in Â§ 922(o) does not impose a burden on conduct falling within the scope of the Second Amendment. Turning first to Heller, we note that that opinion discusses machine guns on several occasions, and each time suggests that these weapons may be banned without burdening Second Amendment rights.

I’ll be honest, I think that’s a misreading of Heller. The Heller opinion does strongly imply that perhaps bans on M16s might be permissible, but it does not explicitly state it. The Court’s opinion calls the reading of Miller that would rule the NFA’s machine-gun provisions unconstitutional “startling.”

Read in isolation, Millerâ€™s phrase â€œpart of ordiÂnary military equipmentâ€ could mean that only those weapons useful in warfare are protected. That would be a startling reading of the opinion, since it would mean that the National Firearms Actâ€™s restrictions on machineguns (not challenged in Miller) might be unconstitutional, machineguns being useful in warfare in 1939. We think that Millerâ€™s â€œordinary military equipmentâ€ language must be read in tandem with what comes after: â€œ[O]rdinarily when called for [militia] service [able-bodied] men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time.â€

I think the Court is correct, except I think the only fair way to determine “common use” is to examine whether the weapon is part of “ordinary police equipment,” the police being the nearest modern analogue to the militia. If theÂ HellerÂ “common use” test were untempered byÂ any analysis of police equipment, the government could evade the “common use” test by banning any new defensive technology before it has a chance to end up being commonly used, as the State of Massachusetts tried to do with electric stun guns (which SCOTUS struck down recently).

So was the NFA truly banning unprotected weapons that have no common defensive use, or was it merely trying to evade Second Amendment protections by preemptively banning it before the people had a chance to speak? To look at that, you have to look at what the police are choosing to arm themselves with, since police carry guns for self-defense, and not to conduct battlefield operations. Are machine guns in common use among police? I don’t know, but the courts should be asking that question before simply categorically declaring machine guns outside of Second Amendment protections.

DC Officials Defying Court Ruling?

Over at “The Federalist,” itÂ is reporting that the author, Devin Watkins, went down to the DC Police Station and applied for a license to carry, leaving the “good cause” section blank. He was told by the officers that they had been instructed to ignore the court order that good cause may not be considered in applications. It never ceases to amaze me how lawless of a lot of big city officials are. If they deny anyone a license for lack of good cause, everyone up and down that chain of command should be held in contempt.

As it stands now, DC is claiming it never told officers any such thing, and that they will be complying with the court order as long as it is in effect. They also say anyone denied a permit for lack of good cause my reapply.