Government – Page 32 – Shall Not Be Questioned

Doesn’t Add Up

ATF made a major bust, and like most bureaucrats looking for a larger budget, makes a nice display of some of the guns they supposedly captured. Is it just me or are there cans on some of those rifles? Where’d they come from? And is it just me, or does one of those look like it’s clicked into the full auto position on the receiver? And what’s with the Ma Deuce in the background? Did they buy that at a gun show or dealer too?

More pictures here. Definitely suppressors on those AKs. Another angle here. We really need to give news photographers lessons in how to take pictures of guns so experts can evaluate the evidence floated. Video here. Pretty clearly there’s equipment in this spread that’s not ordinary, and not available at your average gun dealer.

UPDATE: Tam points out in the comments that they are likely kinks with fake suppressors welded to the barrel to meet the overall length and barrel length requirement of the National Firearms Act. So fake suppressors are the rage among drug cartels these days?

UPDATE: More from Tam:

Theyâ€™re not paying retail for these things; theyâ€™re probably trading dope to somebody here in the states. I donâ€™t think they get too wound up over whether somethingâ€™s full auto or not. These guns arenâ€™t for firefights; theyâ€™re for ambushing opponents, intimidating locals, and shooting witnesses. Cyclic rate isnâ€™t all that important.

Also, not every foot soldier of the cartels gets an autorifle from el patron. In those pictures from that border shootout there were clearly a few thumbhole stocks.

The majority of the guns down there (at least once you get far enough from the border) are probably walking off army bases or coming up from South and Central America. But for us to claim that No Guns No How are coming from the US civilian market makes us look a bit naive.

UPDATE: I think Tam wins the internets on this thread. If you look at this picture, I’m pretty sure I recognize the Century Arms tags that come with the firearm, that they attach to the trigger guard.

SOTU Before it Happens

National Journal has a leak of the State of the Union address tonight. There is no talk of gun control in it whatsoever. Not even a platitude. It’s actually not a bad speech. This is probably as close as I’m going to get to wanting to give Barry O a high-five. As for the Brady Campaign and MAIG? Yeah, it’s that time again:

Drink up guys! You deserve it. Don’t fret over getting stiffed by the President too much. After all, if he had gotten behind new gun control, it would have fired up our base and made a fool of a number of Senate candidates who are up in 2012.

Protecting America …

… from the horrors of chocolate. Thank god for those heros at the Consumer Product Safety Commission. What would we do without them?

Obamacare Repeal Bill

Instapundit is covering it, but it passed with an overwhelming bipartisan majority. It’ll be interesting to see how this fares in the Senate. Obviously Reid is going to protect the President’s agenda, but he might not be able to stop a vote. We’ll see.

UPDATE: It occurs to me this happened with the Assault Weapons Ban too. The House voted to repeal it, but the Senate, which was controlled by Bob Dole, at the time, never took it up. It’s worth pointing out that Dole lost his Presidential bid.

Traver Must Face Confirmation Process

The time for Obama to recess appoint Traver is at an end. This means he has to be confirmed, which I don’t give much of a chance of happening easily given Democratic losses in the Senate.

The Age of Charles Bronson has Ended

I know more than a few gun owners who loved the novelty of having a carry license from Florida with Charles Bronson‘s name on it. Alas, the era of Charles Bronson giving out gun permits is over. Now, you’ll have Adam Putnam’s name on it.

It may not have the novelty factor, but Florida is lucky to have a guy like Putnam in public service.

Could Have Fooled Me

The federal government, because its powers are enumerated, is not regarded to have a “police power”. Could have fooled me. You know, I used to think Bush didn’t have his bureaucrats well under control. Obama makes Bush look like a stern taskmaster in comparison.

Recess Appointment?

The Senate didn’t act on Andrew Traver, so the question becomes, will Obama recess appoint him? My money will be on yes, which will indicate the time of detente with the White House may be over.

Warming our Hearts this Holiday Season

If you’re a wine snob, a free market nut, or just generally hate swindlers and thieves, then I’ve got news to warm your hearts in time for Christmas. Two-thirds of Pennsylvania voters support dismantling the state liquor system this year.

Fresh from the crack research team at the Department of No-Brainers comes a new Quinnipiac University poll this morning concluding that more than two-thirds (66 percent to 26 percent) of state voters favor selling off Pennsylvania’s state-owned liquor stores.

That’s what we call a mandate. Who knew Christmas miracles would come so early this year?

Even better, we get some holiday entertainment in this battle to free our liquor. According to one NPR reporter, the union representing state store employees is so desperate that they are crashing press conferences to argue against it:

Sign state store sale fight heating up: UFCW rep shows up at Q-Poll presser to dispute questions showing majority favor privativation. … Union guy got a tad confrontational when told press conference was for reporters, not interest groups, to ask Qs.

Of course, it looks like the union is going to have to rely on thuggish tactics since appealing to public support isn’t going to help them much. More than half of voters said they support cutting state jobs to balance the budget. With privatizing the system, we cut state jobs, and we get the influx of cash from selling the system and the products.

It will indeed be a very merry Christmas when my mom can bring up a bottle of Virginia wine for a holiday toast and not have to worry about breaking the law.

How We Catch Terrorists

A lot of folks on the Internets aren’t too happy with how the FBI is catching terrorists these days, by seemingly manufacturing them. I can’t say it’s a perfect method for catching terrorists, but I’m not sure what they are doing isn’t the least evil of the options available. First off, suggesting that the FBI is manufacturing terrorists is probably a bit of a hyperbole. Generally speaking, what constitutes entrapment is pretty well defined, and if the FBI wants to have a case, they will be careful to avoid it. So what are the elements of entrapment?

The idea for committing the crime came from the government agents and not from the person accused of the crime.
Government agents then persuaded or talked the person into committing the crime. Simply giving him the opportunity to commit the crime is not the same as persuading him to commit the crime.
The person was not ready and willing to commit the crime before the government agents spoke with him.

If this turns out to be entrapment, I’ll jump on board in criticizing the FBI’s methods. But I don’t really like the idea of violent jihadisÂ wandering around the United States, with only a lack of materials standing between themselves and the next Oklahoma City. If you think about it, the alternatives are probably worse than what the FBI is doing. What alternatives would there be?

More controls over explosives and explosive precursors. Given how many chemicals are explosive precursors, this method doesn’t enthuse me. Plus, much like gun control, it’s not going to stop someone determined. But it will definitely be annoying for people who lawfully use explosives or their precursors.
More domestic spying. If you’re going to keep close enough eye on them to catch them when they finally do hook up with Ahmed the Truck Bomb Maker, you’ll need to keep a close watch on them and anyone they associate with. Without thinking about the manpower issues involved here, it’ll be a big problem if one of these jihadists manage to slip away from his FBI watchers after securing an uncomfortable amount of Semtex.
Widen the GWOT to ensure terrorists have no places to train, hide, or get radicalized. This would be my preferred option, but it’s not politically or economically feasible. You’d have to send troops into Pakistan, Lebanon, Iran, and Yemen. The only way we’re paying for such an expansion of military action is either through massive tax hikes or adding even more to our deficit. That still doesn’t stop the problem of people who are already over here and already radicalized.
Doing nothing as long as terrorism is a low level problem. I’d probably be OK with this too, but the first time one of these guys manages to get his hands on something and executes another Oklahoma City, I can promise you there will be all kinds of restrictions put on not only explosives and precursors, but many civil liberties.
Institute extreme violations of civil liberties for Muslim Americans. I don’t find this option to be remotely acceptable, and don’t think anyone else should either.

So as much as it might feel better if we catch terrorists just before they are about to trigger the detonator on the truck bomb Ahmed built, setting the bar at that height seems to have an awful potential for someone actually pulling it off before agents can intervene. You can’t just think of what your reaction would be to a potential truck bombing. You have to think of what the now frightened population is going to let the civil servants get away with, and it can be guaranteed they will try to get away with as much as they can. Last time we went through this, our wonderful civil servants almost ended model rockery as a hobby in the United States, among other things.

So for now, provided the FBI isn’t unlawfully entrapping people, I’m fine with the FBI hooking up people who have the will to commit violent jihad with what they think is the means, and then busting them. It’s probably the lesser of available evils at the moment. It’s not the explosives that are dangerous, but the jihadist who has no issues murdering men, women and children as they go about their daily lives that’s dangerous. That’s generally been our philosophy when arguing against gun control right?