Via Caleb, who compares and contrasts pro-and anti-gun forces, looks like a local shooting range in Georgia was vandalized by anti-gun folks. I should not that this is the first I’ve heard of this kind of thing. If I were the Brady Campaign, my first thought would be that this kind of thing is the last thing we need, but I would also have to admit that at least someone out there has some passion for the cause. In order to have the problem of having your grass roots do things that embarrass you, first you need to have grass roots!
Month: June 2009
Gun Chicks
A mother and daughter team in Ohio offer basic safety classes to women who want their concealed carry licenses. While they do teach men, they do something a little different and offer all women’s classes to help some get over the intimidation factor.
One of my proudest moments was after teaching a woman to shoot a handgun, taking a break to watch her learn how to shoot rifles ranging from high-end competition .22s to a beat up AK-47 and then hearing her brag about how many clays she busted on the shotgun range. But that wasn’t particularly noteworthy at this all female event. What was noteworthy was when she came up to ask me how to join the club, if there were more women involved other than just me and that this was a first step she was taking after losing two family members to tragedies involving firearms. (IIRC, one was suicide and the other an act of violence.) That was pretty amazing.
Back to the article, one of the women specifically cites getting involved, taking the class, and getting her carry permit as a direct response to Obama’s gun positions. Again, so much for the Brady argument that it’s all seasoned shooters buying up the guns.
AK-15 For Sale
At a gun shop somewhere in Pennsylvania. Maybe they are trying to create a better investment.
More Gun Sales Means More Excise Taxes
I’ve always loved having the argument in my pocket that gun sales are good for Bambi. This California outlet points out that rising gun sales have been VERY good for Bambi in the last few months.
According to a federal report, in the last three months of 2008, the amount of money paid into the fund spiked 31 percent, as compared to the year before. Nearly all of the increase was due to increased handgun production.
Of course, I keep that argument on hand mostly for the folks who sit on the fence or aren’t typically on our side but could be swayed by it. I also realize that the excise tax money can go for public ranges, which some states are quite good about. (Florida and Arizona come to mind.) Hopefully that means in the next couple of years, we’ll see vast improvements in range quality. (It’s going to take a while since the feds only disperse the money once a year and most states don’t have much money to kick in the 25% they are required to pay for projects. It’s not “free” money for them and they can’t print more if they feel like it.)
For the FY2008, money distributed to the states & territories totaled nearly $310 million. It will be interesting to see how much is available by the end of FY2009.
Appeal Filed in Chicago Case
Looks like the appeal to the Supreme Court has been filed.
Veto Override on Restaurant Bill in TN
I’m hearing word that the veto override of the restaurant carry bill passed the TN house 69-27. It now goes on to the Senate.
UPDATE: Yep
UPDATE: Looks like they are setting up Bredesen on the whole “alcohol and guns do not mix” by sending him the same bill, only exempting police officers while off duty. Presumably the officers also would not be permitted to consume alcohol, while off duty and armed, right?  Let’s see if the powers that be think some people are more equal than others.
Microstamping in New York
Jacob reports that it’s making progress. NRA would appear to be robocalling New York members to get them to oppose the bill. Meanwhile, Reasoned Discourse continues.
UPDATE: Tom King talks about Reasoned Discourse too.
No Love for .50 Cals in California State Courts
Eugene Volokh takes a look at a decision in California State Court of Appeals that rules .50 calibers are not constitutionally protected. I think the state court’s analysis of the commonality of these types of arms is deeply flawed, as they are indeed “common” and not any more “dangerous” than other firearms that the State of California has not seen fit to ban.
I also don’t think one can take a self-defense approach to the Second Amendment that only considers self-defense under average circumstances. A Barret M82, or an AR-15 may, under a state of civil order, not be ideal firearms for self-defense under most circumstances. But what about a state of civil disorder? I don’t think self-defense under extreme circumstances can be so easily dismissed.
As I’ve argued, like Professor Nelson Lund has also, that any analysis done under Heller’s common use test has to also consider police use. Does a .50BMG pass this test? I think it would be hard to argue they are common in police arsenals, though some exist. But I would also argue that it is not especially dangerous, compared to other small arms.
Quote of the Day
From Eric of Classical Values:
But here’s my problem: I am sick to death of this creepy feeling that I can’t talk about socialism without sounding like a kook.
He presents this in a greater story about how the word socialist has been tainted by the tendency of those on the right to use is to beat their opponents, no matter how undeserving or ill fitting. I feel the same way he does. You can’t say that nationalizing the American auto industry is “socialism,” when that’s exactly what it is, without associating yourself with overblown rhetoric.
7th Circuit Ruling on Self-Defense
After reading the opinion from the 7th circuit, in between sessions of trying not to crash virtual helicopters, I sense a lot of the infleunce of Judge Posner in the opinion.  Judge Posner wrote an unfavorable article bout Heller not too long after the decision, that appealed to the same arguments we see in the opinion:
The differences in attitudes toward private ownership of pistols across regions of the country and, outside the South, between urban and rural areas, are profound (mirroring the national diversity of views about gay marriage, and gay rights in general, as well as about abortion rights). A uniform rule is neither necessary nor appropriate. Yet that is what the Heller decision will produce if its rule is held applicable to the states as well as to the District of Columbia and other federal enclaves.
Heller gives short shrift to the values of federalism, and to the related values of cultural diversity, local preference, and social experimentation. A majority of Americans support gun rights. But if the District of Columbia (or Chicago or New York) wants to ban guns, why should the views of a national majority control?
But Heller made it pretty clear this wasn’t just about the right to own a gun, but protected a right to “use arms for the core lawful purpose of self-defense.” This isn’t really about the right to own a piece of recreational equipment, it’s about the right to protect one’s own life. What greater natural right can you name other than the right of self-preservation? In fact, the word “self-defense” appears one hundred fifty six times in the opinion, and has been swept aside by the Seventh Circuit. Why? The opinion mentions self-defense, but seems to imply that self-defense could be considered a privilege created through statute.  Volokh has some extensive discussion around that topic too.