Well, That Didn’t Amount to Much

Everytown Rally Capitol Hill

Everytown’s rally on Capitol Hill, that they said would be “massive” turned out to be no bigger than a typical Friends of the NRA dinner. The Philadelphia FNRA dinner turns out twice the number of people as are in that crowd every year:

In an email promoting the event last week Everytown for Gun Safety had promised to “flood the Capitol grounds with gun sense supporters,” and said the protest would be “massive.” Everytown did not provide an estimate on crowd size in their press release summarizing the event.

If you’re going to beat your chest like this, you better be damned sure to deliver something extraordinary if you plan to scare politicians. Bloomberg’s rally is in the realm of “things politicians are used to seeing on Capitol Hill. This is not. Donna Dees’ does not need to worry. She is still the reigning queen of gun control rallies. At least Bloomberg didn’t have to blow a ton of money on busses and box lunches.

Everytown has not been completely without effect, however. Gun sales are smashing records. See? They are having an impact.

Brewing in the Mid 19th Century

Gun news is pretty slow this week, and what news there is I’ll do in the weekly gun news later today. So today I will talk about my other hobby, namely home brewing. I make a batch of beer about every month, and always try to keep something on both of my taps. These days I rarely buy beer on the open market, and I’ve done enough brewing that some of my home brews can compare to some commercial offerings on the craft market (so I’m told). My next step is probably competition brewing, and seeing how my brews measure up. Not long ago I did a post about finding some mid-19th century squat bottles my 4x great-grandfather made. Since then, I’ve been doing research into 19th century brewing, to learn what ingredients might have gone into the “Brown Stout” that appeared on some of his bottles.

The best reference I found for 19th century brewing is in this book, written in the 1850s, “The Complete Practical Brewer.” The first thing that struck me is how much they actually knew about the science behind brewing, in the age before anyone fully understood the microorganisms at work in the process. Brewing in the 19th century is virtually no different than it is today, except for equipment. I found this passage on yeast from the book interesting, because it’s pretty clear they knew little about it:

Yeast is a frothy substance, of a brownish-gray colour and bitter taste, which is formed on the surface of ale or wine while fermenting. If it be put into sacks, the moisture gradually drops out, and the yeast remains be hind in a solid form. It has very much of the flavour and taste of cheese when in this state; but its colour is still darker. This dried yeast promotes or excites fermentation, but it does not answer quite so well as fresh yeast. From the resemblance which dried yeast has to cheese, we would be naturally inclined to infer that it is a species or variety of gluten. But if we attempt to induce fermentation in wort by adding the gluten of wheat, we will be unsuccessful.

After yeast is kept for some time in a cylindrical glass vessel, a white substance, not unlike curd, separates and swims on the surface. If this substance be removed, the yeast loses the property of exciting fermentation. This white substance possesses many of the properties of gluten, or vegetable fibrin, though it differs from it in others. Its colour is much whiter; it has not the same elasticity, and its particles do not adhere with the same force. In short, it agrees much more nearly, in its properties, with curd of milk, than with gluten of wheat.

Yeah, because when you skimmed the substance off the surface, you were actually skimming off the yeast colony. But they couldn’t have known that. Louis Pasteur wouldn’t publish “Physiological Theory of Fermentation” until 1879, nearly three decades after this book was written. But despite the lack of microbiology knowledge among brewers at the time, the book was a treasure trove, and helped me formulate a recipe. Brown Stouts were essentially strong porters (8-10% ABV), made with brown malt. During the French Revolution, supplies of brown malt were disrupted, so brewers switched to pale malts, and used adjuncts to try to reproduce that porter flavor. Various tricks were developed, including darkening sugar in an iron vessel, and then pounding it apart and throwing it in the boil. In the process of switching to pale malts, brewers of the time discovered pale malts were much more efficient than brown. After the introduction of “Black Patent” malt in 1817, brown malt was doomed, but it still was used through most of the 19th century. In the mid 1800s it was common to use one part brown malt to two parts pale malt, so that’s what I went with.

Licorice root was commonly used in the boil, so I used a little star anise. Instead of scorched sugar, I used Belgian dark Candi Sugar. I added some Carafoam to help with body. Brown Stouts were ridiculously hoppy. I was afraid to go quite as far as they would have. At the time, brewers were still using a lot of imported British hops, so I used 3oz of American Cluster hops as the bittering hops, 1oz Brewer’s Gold at 30 mins, and finished with 1oz British Kent Goldings.

If you were ever try to reproduce an ale like this, be warned that while I was prepared for Brown Malt to be less efficient than pale, it was really less efficient. I used 10lb. of Maris Otter and 5lb. of Thomas Fawcett Brown Malt, thinking that would be plenty to get me to my goal. If I had to do it over again, I would use 12lb. of Maris Otter and 6lb. of Thomas Fawcett. That is a “Yuge” ale, to channel The Donald. I had to make up the shortfall by using the whole pound of Candi Sugar, and throwing in 3/4lb. of dry malt extract (DME) into the boil.

From the book, it looks like mid-19th century brewers didn’t pitch very much yeast into their worts. This would affect the flavors the yeast will give off. Some of these would be considered off flavors today. I was reluctant to do this, so I did a full pitch of an American Ale yeast with a starter. I did allow the fermenter to rise to about 72 degrees to give it a bit more of the flavor it probably would have had at the time.

The end result is still fermenting, but I’m hoping it turns out.

Upper Darby Top Cop Wasting Money on Anti-Gun Crusade

UPDATE: Link fixed.

Upper Darby top cop Michael Chitwood likes theatrics, but isn’t a big fan of civilians owning guns. The Upper Darby Police Department is cleaning out its evidence room of guns, but rather than transferring them to an FFL to sell them to law-abiding citizens, he’s sending them all to the incinerator. Who knows what kind of historic pieces could be in there. This statement pretty much says it all:

“Our way of addressing the gun issue in America is to destroy them all,” said Michael Chitwood, township police superintendent.

That, friends, isn’t someone who is pro-gun control. Superintendent Chitwood is anti-gun. If there are any readers here from Upper Darby, I would organize a group of gun owners to flood the next Township Supervisor meeting and demand Chitwood be dismissed. Keep the pressure on. A lot of these local government bodies will fold like a cheap deck of cards even at minor pressure from constituents. At the very least you might be able to convince the Board to make him back off all the gun control crap. This isn’t Chicago or New York, and I’m certain there are still a fair number of gun owners in Delaware County. That message should be sent loud enough and clear enough that Chitwood and the Township Supervisors would rather oil the squeaky wheel than ignore it.

Bradys Get Out There for National Suicide Prevention Week

The Brady Center is back out with one of the more ridiculous arguments I’ve ever heard for gun control, probably in the hopes that it might bring in some much needed cash:

“A Gun in the home makes a suicide three times more likely.”

There are some areas where statistical analysis is useful, but this is not one of those cases. This would be like arguing that having a gun in the home makes it three times more likely you’ll rob a bank. Or perhaps having a bottle of liquor in the home makes it three times more likely that you’ll die from cirrhosis of the liver. Could be high-speed internet links make it 3x more likely you’ll download kiddie porn. All these things may statistically be true, but they are meaningless when applied to individuals.

I am not and have never been suicidal. If you’re not a bank robber, you’re not going to suddenly decide to rob a bank just because there’s a gun around. If you’re not an alcoholic, that statistic is meaningless to you, regardless of the presence of alcohol in your home. You get the picture.

I would say if you have a tendency to be suicidal, you have a loved one with a tendency toward suicidal behavior, or is just generally troubled, you’ll want to take precautions if you own guns. Perhaps gun ownership itself isn’t a wise thing for you in some circumstances. I have no disagreement with that notion.

But for most of us that isn’t the case, and it’s ridiculous, and frankly more than a bit insulting, to suggest otherwise. I am not suicidal. For me that is a meaningless statistic, and it is for most of you too. I’d be willing to bet if you looked up the statistics, and applied some Brady logic, walking across the Golden Gate bridge increases your risk of suicide by an even greater amount!

Northampton County Club in Trouble

Local news outlets are reporting a gun club near Easton, Pennsylvania, is being investigated by the State Police to see if there is any merit to residents accusations that gunfire from the club is hitting their homes.

I haven’t been to the club, so I don’t really know what kind of backstops or baffling they have. From a Google Eyes view, it certainly looks like it’s possible rounds could be impacting residences.

Clubs get a lot of things like this blamed on them even when it’s not coming from the club directly. In some cases I’ve seen, the person hurling accusations at a club are not even downrange, or in one case was in the ballistic shadow of a mountain that stood between the club and the residence.

Hopefully if it does turn out the bullets are coming from the range, they have the resources to correct the problem. A lot of clubs live hand to mouth, and a determination that a range in unsafe can be enough to shut a club down for good.

I’d note that area has seen a lot of in-migration from New Jersey and New York, and there’s a contingent of residents that commute to New York City from that area, so you’ll have plenty of people in the area who don’t want to coexist with a gun club.

Bloomberg Planning Capitol Hill Protest Thursday

Bloomberg is planning a protest on September 10th at Capitol Hill. If any of my readers who live in the area want to go grab a decent wide-angle picture, we’ll see what kind of turnout they can generate with all this new gun control energy the media keeps saying is welling up from the grassroots.

Donna Dees, the person behind the Million Mom March, writes an article over at The Daily Beast about how to organize a march: “Got $3 million? That’s what my march cost in 2000. The bigger the march, the more expensive the march.” Dees seems to believe that with the addition of Social Media, she could have produced a much bigger march than the Million Mom March on Mother Day 2000. I think she discounts that the dynamic of this issue has changed quite fundamentally since 2000. We have more women involved in the shooting sports and armed self-protection than any other time in recent memory. There are other voices, female  voices, out there who will oppose you vigorously. It won’t be as easy this time. Dees article reads like a bit of chest beating to me, almost challenging Bloomberg to do better than she could, knowing he probably won’t.

But Bloomberg certainly has the cash to organize a march on this scale, and you can drive turnout if you’re willing to pay for busses and boxed lunches. Despite the fact that most gun control groups are not doing well, Bloomberg brings more money to the table than the gun control movement has ever had at its disposal. Dees seems to believe, “America is at a rare tipping point now.” I guess Bloomberg’s rally on Capitol Hill will give us an idea of whether or not that’s true.

How to Turn Six into Dozens

In last week’s news link we covered a tweet from CSGV of a protest outside the office of Virginia State Senator John Edwards:

It would seem the local CBS affiliate in southwest Virginia has turned that fantastic crowd of people into “dozens” of protestors. To be fair, it looks like there were one or two more people than are showing in CSGV’s picture, but that doesn’t raise the number to even a dozen, let alone “dozens.” That implies a crowd of at least 24, and more realistically 36. You don’t have 24 people at that protest. The gun control movement would have died years ago if they didn’t have the media willfully helping them drive their preferred narratives.

How’s That SAFE Act Working Out for Ya?

Apparently one of Andrew Cuomo’s aides was caught in the crossfire of a gang shootout in Brooklyn, where apparently one of the gang members opened up with a MAC-10 submachine gun. Cuomo was quick with the gun control:

“We passed the most difficult weapon control law in the the nation, called the SAFE Act and I am proud of it. Anybody who doesn’t believe we need to do something about gun control is delusional—we can protect the second amendment and legitimate gun owners, but we also need to protect people. How many young innocent people have to die before this nation comes to its senses? And this is a terrible, terrible, painful loss and all unnecessary.”

New York has more gun control than any other state in the country. New York City is even more restrictive than the state. Cuomo pushed the SAFE Act in the wake of Sandy Hook, and crime has been going up in New York City. And he thinks we’re the ones that are delusional?

We keep saying gun control doesn’t work, and we keep finding more and more examples of it not working, which causes the politicians to keep blathering that the only way to fix it is to double down on the failure.

And it would be nice if, for once, we could save our thoughts and prayers for the victims and families, without having to respond to politicians like Cuomo flinging insults and using a tragedy to gain political leverage.

State Sovereignty is a Limited Government Value

This is sort of an off topic post, but it ties back to guns in the end, I promise. By now most of you have heard the controversy over Rowan County Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis not issuing same-sex marriage licenses, and being jailed for contempt of court for refusing to obey court orders to issue them. A lot of conservatives have been arguing that to jail Ms. Davis, but not to jail anyone involved in failing to enforce immigration laws in sanctuary cities, amounts to a double standard. On the surface, it might seem like the same issue, but they are subtly different, and legally quite different.

First, we go back to the time before the Civil War, and before the 14th Amendment. Under the original constitution, the states were understood to enter into the union with their sovereignty intact, with both the federal government and state governments being separate sovereigns. So how does this work in practice?

In 1793, Congress passed the first Fugitive Slave Act. A number of states actively undermined the Act by refusing to enforce it. In the early 1840s, the Commonwealth Pennsylvania was sued, and the case went to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court ruled that while federal law was supreme over state law in this area, the states were under no obligation to enforce federal warrants against runaway slaves, or to otherwise enforce federal law. This is pretty much directly applicable to federal immigration warrants. San Francisco is no more obliged to enforce federal law than Pennsylvania was in 1842. But this is not the end of our story, because something very calamitous happened, and that was the Civil War.

The 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments are known collectively as the Reconstruction Amendments. The Thirteenth Amendment abolished slavery, and the Fifteenth Amendment provided voting rights for black men. But the Amendment we’re really interested in here is the 14th, which provides that:

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

This was a radical idea. So radical the Supreme Court would mostly redact it out of the constitution. It wasn’t restored until later in the 20th century, and even today it is not fully restored. What the 14th Amendment essentially did was waive the states sovereignty to a limited degree. When it comes to protecting rights and equality before the law, the federal government is supreme over any state law. This was the intention of the people who drafted the amendment in the first place.

Kim Davis is in jail for contempt because the Supreme Court ruled that same-sex couples had a due process right to marriage under the 14th Amendment. San Francisco officials are not because immigration is a matter of ordinary federal law. A lot of ink has been spilled about whether the Obergefell decision was right or wrong, or about whether it should have been decided as an equal protection issue rather than the strange reasoning Justice Kennedy used in his opinion. But that’s neither here nor there, because legally same-sex marriage is now a right, and state officers can’t interfere with its exercise by denying marriage licenses (one can wonder why marriage licenses are constitutional in the first place, but that’s another post).

I said I would tie this whole thing back into guns. Well, I won’t tie it back, the Supreme Court already did in 1997 when it handed down its opinion in Printz v. United States, an NRA funded case challenging the constitutionality of the Brady Act. The Brady Act made a key constitutional error, in that before NICS was in place, it required local police and sheriffs to conduct background checks on prospective gun purchasers. Most police departments were overwhelmed, because the gun control crowd has never understood that buying gun isn’t solely the domain of a small handful of nutty extremists, but something ordinary people do every day. Jay Printz was a Montana sheriff, and sued the federal government arguing that as an agent of the State of Montana, he was under no obligation to enforce the Brady Act. This case bought us into the modern era of the anti-commandeering doctrine.

The idea that the states can’t be forced or commandeered to enforce federal law is pro-freedom. As gun owners, the states act as a bulwark against future infringement by the federal government on our Second Amendment rights. Sure, the feds are always free to enforce their own laws, but the truth is the feds don’t have the resources to counter widespread civil disobedience on the part of gun owners to whatever gun control schemes they may concoct in the future. Enforcement of federal law generally requires willing cooperation by the states. There will be times when you might not agree with a state’s defiance of federal law or policy, but as someone who believes strongly in a limited federal government, I would never argue the states simply don’t have the right.

Weekly Gun News – Edition 13

Seems fitting that this week’s gun news post is unlucky thirteen, given how this week is going so far. I’ve got a lot to do this week, so let’s get on with it:

Apparently Newspapers in Connecticut don’t realize what NRA’s founding mission is: teaching Yankee soldiers how to shoot straight. This isn’t a “new way of making money,” this is what NRA was founded for, you ignoramuses.

I guess there are some judges that are pretty absolutist when it comes to the Second Amendment.

Miguel notices the irony of the Coalition to Stop Gun Ownership quoting the Declaration of Independence while decrying people having guns as a check on government, ignoring the fact that the Declaration is essentially an outline for a just revolution. Probably because they hate America.

There’s an effort to try to get an assault weapons case to the Supreme Court. My money is on SCOTUS denying cert. That is unfortunately the safe bet these days.

Charles Cooke has his say about CSGV’s “swatting” tactics: “To call a first responder and to alert him that you are scared of a man with a lethal weapon is inevitably to set his heart racing and to raise his adrenalin level to the breaking point. If there is a better way to increase the chances of a mistake, I would like to know what it is.”

Speaking of Charles Cooke, you should be sure to read his masterful challenge to the anti-gun folks, if you haven’t already: “An Open Rant Aimed at Those Who Would Repeal the Second Amendment.”

Cam Edwards: “How Anti-Gunners Prey on Tragedy.” Tragedy is the currency of the realm in that movement.

Speaking of that, Joe Huffman notes the continuing decline of the Brady Campaign. If it weren’t for the Sandy Hook tragedy, they’d be under the waves by now. That’s probably why Colin Goddard is back from the dead, but now working for Bloomberg. I guess we weren’t the only ones to see the writing on the walls.

Yeah, sorry Jeb!, but the 2nd and 14th Amendment says the federal government gets to be involved protecting gun rights. That should, if the courts were willing to do their jobs, mean that gun rights in New York City would be the same as Phoenix. Didn’t Obama use the same argument in 2008? Trump is right. Jeb! is a loser.

Dog bites man: San Francisco is looking at creating more gun laws. So is Albany. California piles on too. Of course they are. The courts have all but surrendered on robust and meaningful protections for the Second Amendment right.

How about making gun powder from your own piss? This method has actually been around for a while.

I made the same mistake SayUncle did. Buy a safe for the number of guns you want, not the number of guns you have. Within reason, of course. I know there’s no safe made that big.

This ignorant mistake by Vox is funny, but it’s not the first time it’s happened. Dave Hardy (at least I think it was Dave) told me a story that the National Rifle Association actually used to be in the same building as the National Recovery Administration, and they used to get each other’s mail.

Hey look, the same coalition of rich assholes are teaming up again to screw gun owners.

You say that like it’s a bad thing: “Australia Reduced Mass Violence by Confiscating Guns. In the U.S., Police Sell Them Back to Citizens.” Sounds like the proper way to run a railroad to me. Never let them tell you nobody wants to take your guns.

Chris Cox: “In fact, even a seasoned propagandist would blush at the level of coordination now employed by those arrayed against us, especially considering that at its core, the “science” they continue to promote is devoid of any basis in reality. As Vladimir Lenin is purported to have said, ‘A lie told often enough becomes the truth.‘” When you see the same narrative popping up on a bunch of media sites, as is often the case, yeah, that’s no accident.

This meme about gun control being renewed, or re-energizing the debate has been seen many places. Again, this is no accident. This is coordinated propaganda put out by one rich billionaire meant to manipulate public opinion.

The “I’m a gun owner, but…” meme is now recirculating too. If you think there are actual gun owners behind this, I have a bridge to sell you. Though, I would be willing to bet a lot of money there are prominent people in the gun control movement who own guns, and not just for killing deer.

I really can’t detect a difference between these people and pearl clutching old ladies. The way to get back at dour puritans is just to have fun.

Tam: “Perhaps at some point in time, it was a thing for armed robbers to square up twenty-one feet from their victim and yell ‘Hey! Could you toss your wallet over here?’” Including a graphic of a target that even in my derp phase I thought was pretty derpy.

I’m going to guess this means Cabela’s won’t be caving into Bloomberg’s demands. Not that I ever really thought they would.

Bob Owens: “If this account is roughly accurate, we’re possibly looking at another situation where a law enforcement officer was worried about being attacked for using too much force against an ‘unarmed’ man or men.” The agitators have made self-defense a lot more risky. That was their plan all along.

I’ve known and worked with very good scientists who would agree that the peer review process is complete bullshit.

Look who also has her own private e-mail server. Kane is a Clinton ally, so this should be no surprise.

The White House has acknowledged their gun control agenda is total bullshit.

When your busybody proposals provoke a backlash from voting adults, clearly the remedy is to switch the effort to “protecting the children.” They already do this with Second Amendment rights, because if kids have access to guns, someone might get hurt!

Pro-gun people hijack Twitter hashtag campaign. I don’t spend much time on Twitter because it’s a vast wasteland for the most part, but for those of you willing to brave the fever swamps, good show!

I’d note that the turnout for the last Roanoke area Friends of the NRA Dinner I could find turned out 46x the number of people than this pathetic protest by paid activists.