Count this among things I’d never thought I’d see even just 5 years ago: editorial in the Denver Post sticking up for gun rights for medical marijuana users. This issue would take care of itself if Congress passed a medical marijuana law, because then those users would no longer be “unlawful.”
Category: The Media
Pittsburgh Post Gazette Doesn’t Get HR822 Close to Correct
We can expect the amount of hysterics over HR822 to continue, and for it to get ridiculous, such as this editorial in the Pittsburgh Post Gazette:
H.R. 822, or the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act, would force every state to honor every other state’s permit to carry a concealed gun — no matter how lax the other state’s standards. That would mean a convicted felon who can’t pass muster in, say, Pennsylvania, could get a permit elsewhere, and local law enforcement would have no choice but to let him walk around with a loaded weapon.
You see, she must have heard of this “Florida Loophole” thing, but instead of doing actual research to understand the issue, she’ll just shoot her ignorant mouth off. First off, in the language of HR822:
Notwithstanding any provision of the law of any State or political subdivision thereof, related to the carrying or transportation of firearms, a person who is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm, and who is carrying a government-issued photographic identification document and a valid license or permit which is issued pursuant to the law of a State and which permits the person to carry a concealed firearm, may carry a concealed handgun (other than a machinegun or destructive device) that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, in any State, other than the State of residence of the person, that-
That automatically excludes felons, people who have been adjudicated mentally ill, and anyone with a misdemeanor domestic violence convictions. That makes sense, since these people may not legally own or possess firearms in all 50 states. She also brings up Florida Loophole poster child Marqus Hill. I have shown why Mr. Hill is a failure of the City of Philadelphia, and not the State of Florida. That irrelevant to begin with, because HR822 does now allow you to carry in your state of residence on a reciprocal license, so HR822 would have been no assistance to someone of Marqus Hill’s disposition.
So either MAIG is employing the ignorant to speak out against HR822, or they have resorting to being deliberately deceptive. Not that I can blame them. Half truths and hysterics is all they know.
What Other Rights Work Like This?
Let me paraphrase a bit from a Washington Post editorial:
Many states already have agreements to recognize newspaper licenses from other jurisdictions. Virginia, for example, honors licenses from 27 other states that have similarly robust standards; Maryland, which strictly regulates what newspapers may be sold, and the District, which essentially prohibits it, do not recognize out-of-state licenses. These are legitimate choices that would be overridden by a federal legislature that too easily bends to the will of the news lobby. Nevada, a strong press-rights state, rescinded its agreement with Utah because Utah does not require training in acceptable viewpoints. Why should Congress to overrule that judgment?
Just saying, WaPo. Careful how you treat the Bill of Rights. It’s not a buffet, from which you can load up your plate with parts you enjoy, and spit in the parts that you don’t. After Heller and McDonald declares then fundamental constitutional rights, no different than other rights in that family, that’s going to necessarily have consequences, and this is one of them.
Once Again, We’re the Scapegoats
We’re made out to be responsible for the acts of murdering criminals. I know about this unfortunate murder, because in Twitter Space, the Brady Campaign have been hanging about like a sleazy ambulance chasing lawyer at the scene of a fatal accident.
Sorry, but I didn’t kill that young woman. It’s illegal under federal law, in case the NY Daily News is not aware, to buy firearms in South Carolina and smuggle them to New York City to sell on the streets to criminals. You can do ten years for each count in the federal pen. I don’t know what else we’re supposed to do, that still respects the fact that being able to buy a gun is a basic, fundamental right if you’re law-abiding.
Getting the blame for the criminal actions of others is one of my primary motivations for staying active in this issue. There’s no practice of our opponents that I find more motivating than their attempts to make me the scapegoat for these social ills. It’s ironic that the New York Daily News probably believes it’s helping fan the flames of gun control, but in reality they are sowing the seeds of the destruction of New York City’s gun laws, by keeping people like you and me in the game.
Castle Doctrine Hysteria
When Gov. Corbett signed a law June 28 expanding the right to use deadly force outside the home, gun-control proponents predicted every thug would have a new defense to pulling the trigger.
It didn’t take long.
Just eight days after the new “castle doctrine” law took effect, it has been raised in the defense of a North Philadelphia man charged with killing a neighbor over $100 owed in the purchase of a pit bull puppy.
Of course, they are going to raise self-defense, since that’s one of the main defenses used against the charge of murder. That was true before castle doctrine, and it’ll be true after. The way they continue to describe the case, it looks like a pretty run of the mill self defense claim. In this case, Johnson was threatened by several men:
Cruz testified that Jetson Cruz asked Johnson why he threatened Samantha, then shoved him, and that “Lydell pulled a gun from his waist and started shooting.”
That’s likely going to hinge on whether he had a reasonable fear of imminent death or grave injury, rather than a duty to retreat. Multiple attackers against one can be reasonable under certain circumstances. The Inquirer is making mountains out of molehills here. This is a fairly ordinary self-defense claim, and I don’t think Castle Doctrine is likely to pay a big role in it, or a role at all.
USA Today Peddling Contrived Controversy
USA Today is jumping on the bandwagon, reporting about the manufactured controversy over the PIMA County GOP raffling off a Glock 23. Aside from not even being the same model Glock that the nut used to shoot up the Giffords rally, it also happens to be, quite likely, the most common brand of handgun sold today. There’s nothing odd or unusual about it.
Caroline Brewer, spokeswoman for the Brady Campaignto Prevent Gun Violence, said it doesn’t matter that it is legal to raffle a gun. “Where is their moral compass? It boggles the mind,” she said. “This is insensitive to Rep. Giffords and all the families in Tucson involved in the shooting.”
This controversy is one that’s been entirely manufactured by Democratic operatives and Washington DC based groups who don’t have much to do these days except sit around waiting for their organizations to run out of money.
If our opponents want to go back to the days of railing for handgun prohibition, they are welcome. This is a losing issue for them. The implication is you’re a bad person for owning or wanting a Glock, and an awful lot of people own them. So please, Brady folks, keep on marching down that road to irrelevance.
UPDATE: Robb Allen in the comments: “Would these people have a problem with a car dealer on Chappaquiddick Island raffling off a car?”
Quote of the Day: Gun Traditions
NEW ENGLAND has a centuries-old tradition of both gun manufacturing and gun control. It shouldn’t have to pick between the two. However, at least one manufacturer is trying to force the matter. Proposals to require that guns be made suitable for micro-stamping, a technology which would allow shell casings to be traced back to the exact gun they were fired from, have been introduced in the Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Massachusetts legislatures. These have drawn significant criticism from gun manufacturers, at least one of which, Colt, is threatening to move out of New England if such legislation is adopted.
The rest of this sorry article admonishes the manufacturers for holding jobs hostage. Like the manufactures owe the hostile New England states a living, and are required to continually bend over and take it. No blame for the politicians pushing a completely unproven and dubious technology? It’s the politicians threatening the jobs, you ignoramuses at the Globe, not the manufacturers.
But not only is does the Globe show ignorance of who to blame, they show an ignorance of history as well. The Globe describes gun control in New England as a “centuries old tradition”. Reality is, it’s not even a century old tradition, at least not for the kind of gun laws that the Globe regularly speaks in favor of. Most of it, in fact, is less than a half-century old, and much less than 25. Centuries old Boston gun control was regulating where and how one could set up for target practice on Boston Commons, or the old Boston ordinance that said if you’re going to store your rifle, musket, pistol, bomb grenade or artillery piece, it would be nice if you stored it unloaded/deactivated so as not to cause fire hazards. It was still, until the 20th century, legal to carry a loaded pistol around Boston. Does the Globe favor returning to that gun control tradition?
This is not a tradition, Globe Editorial Board, it is a thoroughly modern hysteria. The legal framework this hysteria has produced, is in the process of being dismantled, using our very real constitutional tradition. Imagine that, Globe Editorial Board.
Media Doesn’t Matter
Lots of people have informed me I’ve been linked by Media Matters. I’m going to guess the Media doesn’t really Matter when you have time to pick on B-list blogs like this one. That said, I’m glad that my readers are alert and paying attention, as I never would have noticed the whole eleven hits they’ve sent me as of the time I’m posting this. I got more traffic yesterday from No Looking Backwards, who hasn’t posted anything in over a year, than I got from Media Matters. If this is Joyce’s attempt to counter the Republican Media Juggernaut, I just have to say I hope they continue to flush their money down the toilet. But Media matters took some time to refute something of mine, so I thought I should take some time to explain why I think their position is tenuous.
It is no secret that our community opposes registration of firearms. I myself do not favor it because I haven’t seen any evidence is accomplishes anything, and we’ve seen enough abuses and potential abuses to dissuade us. California has strict registration, and still has a rather high violent crime rate. Pennsylvania keeps computerized records of every gun sold, and yet Philadelphia still is still one of the more violent large cities. Michigan has registration, as does Chicago. Both Detroit and Chicago are extremely violent cities. So registration is off the table, and we’re not negotiating on that. We have the political power that we do not have to.
But the biggest mistake that Media Matters makes in their refutation of my assertion is this:
Strawing buying, buying a gun on behalf of a prohibited person,  is a federal crime but only certain states enable local prosecutors to target straw buyers. In New Jersey a local prosecutor could go after a straw buyer independently, not so in Delaware or Pennsylvania.
This is completely untrue. Straw buying is a crime in Pennsylvania. There is no private transfers for handguns in this state. If you buy a handgun, or transfer a handgun, it has to go through an FFL or a Sheriff. One of the two. What does Media Matters thinks enforces that law? Harsh language? The local police and local DA’s enforce it. Ask Tom Corbett and Lynne Abraham if there are state laws that allow local prosecution of straw buyers.
Delaware does not restrict private transfers between persons not prohibited. But Delaware does make it a crime to pass a firearm to a prohibited person, and they also have a state level straw purchasing statute. Nonetheless, despite the fact that the First State has fewer controls on the sale, transfer and disposition of firearms than Pennsylvania, it is not a significant source of crime guns for New Jersey, or any other state.
So Media Matters is completely ignorant of their knowledge of the relevant law in this area, which is hardly surprising given that their prattling in this issue have generally tended toward extreme ignorance when I’ve come across them. They are also ignorant in their statement of this fact:
Regardless of how New Jersey compares to other States there are lots of Federal Firearms Licensees in New Jersey. Further, there is no reason to assume the gun traffickers Vice mentions are necessarily previously convicted criminals unable to legally obtain firearms.
When looking at sources of guns, I think comparing New Jersey to other states is kind of important, especially given how many violent cities in the Garden State border Pennsylvania. Unlike the law abiding, criminals don’t have any reason not to cross a state border. You’d expect a serious FFL disparity would pretty heavily influence where guns come from. Rather than going through a specific site, I went straight to the ATF to find out what the numbers are. But first, what are the trace numbers for New Jersey?
First off is that New Jersey is New Jersey’s largest source of crime guns, at 405. This is followed by Pennsylvania, at 284, and then North Carolina (185), then Virginia (171). New York State, which New Jersey shares a border with was 67. Delaware, which borders New Jersey had no guns traced to it, despite having the most lax sale and transfer laws of any state bordering it. Maryland had 27 traces. I don’t think the role of FFL density can be denied in influencing these numbers.
New Jersey has 265 dealer type FFLs. Pennsylvania has 2225. That’s not just a few more FFLs. That’s an order of magnitude more FFLs. New York State has about half as many (1622), and they are much more concentrated upstate than Pennsylvania’s, which exist in high density in border areas. Delaware has 114 FFLs to its name, which is reflected in low stats to New Jersey or any state. North Carolina has slightly more than New York, at 1753. Virginia has even less at 1419. Keep in mind that Virginia has a one-gun-a-month statute, and North Carolina requires a permit to purchase a handgun, the same as New Jersey. Maryland, which also requires a purchase permit, has 484 FFLs.
So what kind of correlations do we find? Does where guns come from correlate more to Brady Score or the number of FFLs? Or Capital to Capital distance? There is actually no correlation between FFL numbers and traces overall, because the strongest correlation, which isn’t actually all that strong, is Capitol to Capitol distance, with a Pearson correlation of about 0.4. There was a very small correlation between number of traces and Brady Score, but it was in the opposite direction, of -0.3 correlation, meaning that the higher the Brady score went, the more guns could be traced from that state to New Jersey.
If you consider the effect that geography has on trace numbers, and restrain the correlation to states that are under 300 miles capital-to-capital distance from New Jersey, you get a correlation of 0.87, which is actually quite strong. Even just eliminating New Jersey itself from consideration, the correlation increases to 0.23 comparing FFL numbers to traces overall.
So we can see that the two major factors when it comes to guns being traced in New Jersey from other states is either distance from the state, or the number of FFLs it has. There is no correlation on Brady Score if you take the same limitations for that. Therefore, despite Media Doesn’t Matter’s calling into question of the integrity of my claims, they stand up to analysis. It is their claims which fall over. Perhaps they want to go on a mission to reduce the number of FFLs. New Jersey’s has certainly been successful at doing that, by largely extinguishing interest in shooting and gun ownership through the use of byzantine laws and stifling regulation. But in our Constitutional framework, that’s an unworkable goal, and should not be advocates by anyone who claims to care about the Bill or Rights.
Tough to Admit You Were Wrong
The Roanoke Times is having a hard time coming to grips with the fact that concealed carry in restaurants hasn’t increased crime in those places, but that crime in bars and restaurants actually seems to have decreased, and proceeds to rationalize their position, and suggest they could still be proven right:
But it is irresponsible to extrapolate too much from a naïve numerical count. Other factors weigh on crime rates. For example, was business down in bars over the same period? If bars had fewer patrons drinking less during the recession, then gun incidents might similarly fall off.
A 5 percent change could be statistical noise. It could reflect a decline from a previous increase. It could be the result of reduced enforcement in the face of less spending on public safety. Without deeper analysis and context, it is unreasonable to conclude any causal connection exists.
But if there had been a five percent increase, you can bet they’d be shouting from the rooftops how right they were. All their criticisms very well could be valid, but the fact of the matter is, the sky did not fall. We told you the sky would not fall. Now you don’t want to admit you were wrong, and that just seems to us to be a lot of whining to us.
The Truth Must Sting
Dave Hardy points out this Washington Post article, defending their record on Fast and Furious, and notes the true record here doesn’t reflect the Posts’ defense of themselves. From the Post:
David S. Fallis, Cheryl W. Thompson, James Grimaldi and Horwitz. Leen said that he and the reporters who wrote the Southwest border part of that series, Grimaldi and Horwitz, never heard of, or had even an inkling of, the top-secret Fast and Furious effort until indictments in the case were announced in late January in Phoenix by U.S. attorneys and the ATF.
It’s funny, I had heard about it by then, and had been hearing about it for several weeks when that expose came out. Here’s a handy timeline of how this story came about. The fact is, the Posts’ reporting on Fast and Furious has been abysmal, they should be ashamed, and it’s never been more obvious to me they are in the tank for the Administration. The fact that they feel they need to respond to critics is probably the best indication of all that we have a point.