Guns – Page 1101 – Shall Not Be Questioned

Let’s Not Make a Federal Case Out of It

Jesse Jackson has a well deserved reputation as an attention whore.Â Do we really need to go adding more federal crimes to the books because of that fact?

After denouncing the demagoguery of Rev. Jesse Jackson in his continued protests at a suburban Chicago-area gun shop, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms today announced that it has drafted federal legislation that would prevent such protests from interfering with legal businesses.

â€œThis is not an attack on the First Amendment rights of Jesse Jackson or anyone else,â€ said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb. â€œBut it would put an end to the kind of publicity-seeking shenanigans that Jackson and his cohort, anti-gun Catholic priest Michael Pfleger, have been conducting at Chuckâ€™s Gun Shop in suburban Riverdale for the past three weeks. Weâ€™re working on Capitol Hill right now to gather sponsors.

Jesse Jackson and Snuffy Pfleger were already arrested under state law for trespassing. Â Why exactly do we need to make a federal issue out of this?

What’s the Fascination?

If this guy thinks that Ahab’s blog is scary, the contents of my safe would absolutely make him crap his pants.Â Why is it that no one ever asks someone into classic cars “What’s your fascination with engines?Â Why do you need an engine that will do 110MPH?”Â Or someone into coin collecting “What’s your fascination with coins?Â Clearly you’re just a greedy bastard.”Â Â No one ever asks a golfer what his fascination is with constantly acquiring new and better golf clubs, or finding new and challenging courses.

But all kinds of false assumptions are made about people who enjoy the shooting sports and collectors.Â Ahab has it exactly right: they are just machines folks, relax, and don’t worry yourself about it.Â A street urchin with a broken beer bottle should be more worrisome than a guy at the range firing a machine gun.

Going E-Postal: The Reload Drill

I got my entry submitted to Sailorcurt. I managed to tie Ahab!

If I hadn’t pulled that three, I would have beaten him! But such is life in when shooting. It only takes a little jerk. I noticed I was worse on the initial draw and aim, than on the reload and aim.

So my goal of one day beating Ahab in an e-postal match still remains elusive, but I tied at least! This is the type of shooting I practice most often. Granted I don’t usually do double tap, reload, double tap, but I generally practice rapid, not too carefully aimed fire. I liked this e-Postal, as it actually exposed some flaws I had in my shooting technique when practiced from draw (well, as close to draw as I could do at the range) and reload. I think I might actually add the double tap reload drill to my regular routine.

We’ll see how it goes overall. I’m hoping I scored properly. I’m only used to rough scoring for myself. My general rule for touching the ring is if I can’t see any white between the ring and the bullet mark, it’s touching. I have no idea if that’s the right rule to use though.

I Don’t See it Either

Clayton still isn’t buying GOA’s concerns about HR2640.Â I’m not either.

At Least We Don’t Have to Pay Our Bozos

I have to agree with SayUncle that this is not the way to go about things. Any political movement will have its whack jobs. I would point out some examples of anti-gun people coming to my site to leave bozotic comments, but there aren’t any. In order to have bozos, you have to actually have some grass roots. When you don’t have grass roots, you have to resort to paying people to be bozos.

Ahab Has a Mighty Fine Idea

I totally dig the concept of a Personal Defense Weapon (PDW) in .17HMR.Â Â I’d buy one!Â How hard is it to get a SOT for making SBRs?Â Maybe things would go easier with the budget committee if the gun hobby were bringing in money :)

Read the Law – It gets worse

The signing of a bill to make criminals out of ordinary citizens who fail to report a stolen in Connecticut is making its way around the blogosphere, but it’s always good to read the actual law.Â Â You can read the whole act here.

(a) Any person who lawfully possesses an assault weapon under sections 29-37j and 53-202a to 53-202k, inclusive, and subsection (h) of section 53a-46a or a firearm, as defined in section 53a-3, that is lost or stolen from [him] such person shall report the loss or theft to [law enforcement authorities] the organized local police department for the town in which the loss or theft occurred or, if such town does not have an organized local police department, to the state police troop having jurisdiction for such town within seventy-two hours of when such person discovered or should have discovered the loss or theft. Such department or troop shall forthwith forward a copy of such report to the Commissioner of Public Safety. The provisions of this subsection shall not apply to the loss or theft of an antique firearm as defined in subsection (b) of section 29-37a.

Most of these bills, including the one in Pennsylvania, are specific to require reporting after discovery of the theft. Â That doesn’t mean you need to constantly inventory. Â However, if you notice the part I highlighted in this bill, you will see a big problem with this one.Â What defines “should have discovered?”Â Who gets to decide whether I should have?Â Â Either you’ve discovered it or you haven’t.Â Â This is RIPE for abuse.

Any person who fails to make a report required by subsection (a) of this section within the prescribed time period shall commit an infraction and be fined not more than ninety dollars for a first offense and be guilty of a class D felony for any subsequent offense, except that, if such person intentionally fails to make such report within the prescribed time period, such person shall be guilty of a class C felony. Any person who violates subsection (a) of this section for the first offense shall not lose such person’s right to hold or obtain any firearm permit under the general statutes.

So it goes from a summary offense to a class D felony on the second count?Â Absolutely ridiculous. Â If I get two guns stolen, and I discover it two weeks later, and prosecutor decides I should have discovered it, I’m facing a felony count? Â Pardon me if I don’t say “screw you” to the politicians in Connecticut.Â Connecticuit has always been a moderately anti-gun state.Â Â Looks like they are moving to join their neighbors in being a place that likes to find excuses to lock up law abiding gun owners.

It also adds a new crime of firearms trafficking:

(a) A person is guilty of firearms trafficking if such person, knowingly and intentionally, directly or indirectly, causes one or more firearms that such person owns, is in possession of or is in control of to come into the possession of or control of another person whom such person knows or has reason to believe is prohibited from owning or possessing any firearm under state or federal law. (b) Any person who violates any provision of this section shall be guilty of a class C felony if such person, on or after the effective date of this section, sells, delivers or otherwise transfers five or fewer firearms, and a class B felony if such person, on or after the effective date of this section, sells, delivers or otherwise transfers more than five firearms.

This is a bad law, and they are trying to pass similar legilsation in Pennsylvania.Â I will continue to fight it here.Â Â My current state rep supports the anti-theft provisions. Â I am going to write him about what has just happened in Connecticut, and tell him to make sure it does not happen here.

Jesse Jackson Gets Pinched

Joe has the scoop. Good! You can be an asshole all you want, but don’t trespass on people’s property.

UPDATE: Looks like Snuffy was with him, and got himself arreated too! Double plus good!

UPDATE: Looks like the AP has picked it up now.

Six And a Half Years?

Six and a half years for a crime that had no victim, and for mere possession of devices that supposedly have some kind of constitutional protection I think I might have heard of somewhere. Why the 1/2? Will the extra half year really teach Mr. Fincher a lesson that the prior six won’t?

I don’t think taking on federal gun laws in this manner is a wise idea, but this kind of time for a man in his sixties who is no danger to anyone seems like a waste of tax dollars and federal prison space that could be used to house, I don’t know, people who are actually violent and willing to harm others.

All in the name of “reasonable restrictions” I suppose?

What is a Machinegun?

A machinegun is actually a legal term, and not what we generally think of as machine gun.Â Â The definition is actually found in Title 26, which is the tax code:

The term “machinegun” means any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger. The term shall also include the frame or receiver of any such weapon, any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun, and any combination of parts from which a machinegun can be assembled if such parts are in the possession or under the control of a person.

The big problem with ATFs regulations surrounding machineguns is that the law itself sucks, so it allows the ATF to be rather arbitrary and capricious in drawing up regulations when issues come up.Â To me that is the heart of the problem.Â Any law which is defined so badly that it allows a government bureaucracy to turn people into criminals with the stroke of a pen is an unconstitutional delegation of Congress’ law making powers to the executive branch.

Big problems in this law are:

The term “readily restored” is not clearly defined.
By the language “any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun,” you may not be able to have any machine gun part.Â Even if you don’t have enough parts to make an actual machine gun. Â I’ve heard of people getting in trouble for having M16 bolt carriers in their AR-15s, even though an M16 bolt carrier is insufficient to make a machinegun, because theres no auto sear in an AR-15 for the bolt carrier to trip.
And of course “The term shall also include the frame or receiver of any such weapon” is probably where ATF’s one a machinegun always a machinegun crap came from.

If I were to rewrite this law, assuming I didn’t have the power to get rid of it entirely, I would have written it as such:

The term “machinegun” means any weapon which shoots automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single actuation of the trigger. The term shall also include any combination of parts from which a machinegun can be assembled if such parts are in the possession or under the control of a person.

To me that language preserves the essential framework of the law, but closes the door to a lot of nonsense by the ATF. Â Under this law, you could have a machine gun receiver, or a machine gun part, as long as you didn’t have all the parts you needed to make a machinegun.Â No more readily converted nonsense.Â Either you have a machinegun, have the parts, or you don’t.Â Pretty simple, I think.