Snowflakes in Hell

John Street is holding a conference with other area mayors, talking about ways they can crap all over lawful gun owners in this commonwealth (and other states). I particularly like the headline here “Mayor Street Hosts Area Mayors for Anti-Gun-Violence Summit”. So does that mean the mayor would be happy if people were getting their skulls bashed in with baseball bats? The problem in Philadelphia is violence in general, not just the guns. But here’s where the irony comes in:

Mayor Street and about a dozen regional mayors were holding a daylong summit on Friday at the National Constitution Center on how to curb gun violence.

Emphasis mine. The National Constitution Center? Are you friggin kidding me? I think we have to remind the mayor of something. First federal, Amendment II:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Now the Pennsylvania Constitution, Art. 1, § 21:

The right of the citizens to bear arms in defence of themselves and the State shall not be questioned.

Emphases mine, just in case John Street thinks that part isn’t clear. But does Mayor Street get the irony of his venue?

Street wants the mayors to work for stricter gun laws — especially in Pennsylvania, whose gun laws Street called “lax.”

Nope.

Let me just clarify my position on Act 71. The way it stands now, I don’t think it’s acceptable, but I don’t want to go back to just making gambling flat out illegal, nor do I like the folks who are fighting it. The folks coming out against Act 71 are doing it because they think gambling is bad and immoral, at the root. I’m doing it, because I don’t appreciate Ed Rendell using legalized gambling to help line the pockets of his political cronies, and I’d like to see it being done differently so that’s there’s less government and less politics involved in the process.

I’ve never bought Ed Rendell’s justification for passing Act 71; that it’ll bring in enough revenue to offset other taxes. I have no problem with the state taxing gambling, or licensing establishments for gambling, provided the licensing requirements are objective and free from political influence of powerful people. But it was was about revenue for me. I would have been happy with a “because we’re not your fucking parents” justification for liberalizing the commonwealth’s gambling laws.

Via Ahab, comes a story of a man who gets arrested after confronting trespassers on his property while armed. I think charges are a bit harsh here, since the owner claims he wasn’t brandishing, but it’s a valuable lesson: Your gun doesn’t come out of your holster unless you intend, and are justified legally, to use deadly force against someone. Otherwise, keep it in your holster. The best way to deal with trespassers is to call the police.

I noticed that neither of my senators have signed on to this bill. I will have to write both of them to make sure it stays that way. In the mean time, I’ve sent this to Senator Hutchinson:

Dear Senator Hutchinson,

I am not a resident of Texas, but I believe your introduction of S.1001, to repeal the Washington D.C. gun ban, raises some issues of national impact with respect to the effect it could have on the Parker vs. DC case, that will likely come before the Supreme Court of the United States.

I do want to thank you for your support of our second amendment rights, and I appreciate the sentiment that went into your introduction of this bill, but I don’t want Congress’ repealing of the Washington DC gun ban to remove standing for the Parker plaintiffs, and render the case moot.

The time has come for the Supreme Court to speak on the second amendment. Many of us who are advocates for gun rights and the second amendment believe Parker is the case that has the best change of favorable review from The Court. While I appreciate the sentiment displayed in S.1001, I sincerely hope this bill will not advance until Supreme Court has had a chance to make a definitive ruling on the Washington D.C. gun ban.

Sincerely,

[Sebastian]
Langhorne, PA

I will e-mail something along those lines to my senators before the end of the day. I will also go bark up the NRA’s tree a bit to make sure they know I don’t want them screwing up the Parker case either. A lot of noise about getting rid of the D.C. gun ban coming from Congress will do us a huge favor when it comes time for court review, but in no way do we actually want anything like this to pass.

It’s relatively easy for me to get a Virginia Concealed Handgun Permit, especially since I’m spending a lot more time down there now.  I was thinking it would be good to have, so I’m good to carry in West Virginia, but I noticed they take resident licenses only.   How is it that states like West Virginia, Oregon, and Nevada lack good reciprocity?   It would seem to would be relatively easy to pass something there.

While I favor the legalization of slots within The Commonwealth, commonly referred to Act 71, I don’t really appreciate the fact that Ed Rendell seems to be using the act to pay off political favors:

Boyd Gaming Corp and its partners submitted an application to the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board late December 2005 to open a Slots Parlor and high-rise hotel on a 125 acre plot in Limerick, PA, just off the Sanatoga exit of Rte. 422 and adjacent to an outlet mall proposed by Chelsea Property Groups. A major partner to Boyd in this proposal is David Sweet, the former campaign manager for Gov. Rendell. The site for the proposed casino is not currently zoned for such a use.

Now, I don’t agree with the folks I linked to that Act 71 ought to be repealed. I think it needs some reform, but I do favor gambling being generally legal, so I think it’s a step in the right direction. The problem with the act is, there’s not enough protection to keep politicians like Governor Rendell from milking the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board for their own benefit.

My proposal would be getting the gaming control board out of the business of approving casinos. They should be licensed the same way liquor establishments are, and whether they ought to be approved for zoning left up to the local communities. I’d like to see the GLCB merely implementing regulations and taxes on gambling establishments as authorized by the state legislature. Anything more is going to invite cronyism.

From Captain Ed, we learn the Democrats want to enact the largest tax increase in US history:

The bill set to reach the House floor today (resembling the Senate version) would raise taxes an average of $1,795 on 115 million taxpayers in 2011. Some 26 million small-business owners would pay an average of $3,960 more. The decreased number of Americans subject to income taxes would all pay higher taxes, and 5 million low-income Americans would be returned to the rolls.

But it’s going to go to balancing the budget right?

The House version would increase non-defense, non-emergency spending by $22.5 billion for next fiscal year, with such spending to rise 2.4 percent in each of the next three years. To pay for these increases, the resolution would raise taxes by close to $400 billion over five years — about $100 billion more than what was passed in the Senate.

The Democrats are just as bad or worse than the boneheads they replaced.  I already pay way too much in taxes to the federal government, upward is really not the direction I want to see my tax bill going.  Apparently the Republicans have decided that they need to give more than lip service to cutting government and fiscal responsibility:

Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, the fifth-termer who is the House Budget Committee’s new ranking Republican, has proposed an alternative resolution. It not only retains Bush tax cuts but also proposes deep reductions in spending, protects Social Security payments and runs down the national debt.

Heh.  The authors closing statement sums up my feelings exactly: “Why was no such resolution advanced during the 12 years the GOP was in the majority?”  Good question!

… but Austin Bay reminds us why gun snobbery is for the birds:

I do take exception to the gun snob comments about the Beretta 92. That’s the civilian version of the M9. I could not hit squat with the service .45 I carried in the 1970s while on duty in Germany. The weapon was a rattle trap, which was no doubt part of the problem. However, a couple of the NCOs told me my accuracy problem “isn’t entirely the weapon’s fault.” Hah. Well, I agreed. I was adequate with a rifle, but the pistol? Yes, I can see the barn’s broadside. No, I cannot hit the barn’s broadside — not with my service .45.

But the Beretta I had in Iraq was something else entirely — I managed to qualify sharpshooter with it. I know, the superior gunfighters out there will dismiss that as the sorry effort of a chronic poor shot. However, I came within two rounds of qualifying expert. That’s a huge change. I had confidence I could hit a target.

It all comes down to what works for you. I’ve always been able to shoot well with a Glock, and struggle a lot more with Bitter’s single stack SIG. Ahab of WWJWD likes to carry a Walther P22, which most people would deride. Shot placement is key, and a pistol chambered in .22LR that you hit your target consistently with will do a lot more than one in .50 AE that you can’t hit shit with. While there are certain firearms that shouldn’t be carried for safety reasons, I’ve always been of the opinion that you should carry what you’re comfortable with, and enjoy shooting enough to practice a lot, so your shot placement is good.

I noticed something in one of Glenn’s updates on the post I linked to previously, from one of his readers:

Isn’t part of this story irresponsibility? As a former Boy Scout Marksman, I was drilled on not only the proper shooting of a firearm, but it’s handling, transportation and storage. A loaded handgun has only two places to be. On your person under immediate control, or in a locked case. Some would argue the locked case should never contain a loaded weapon. Carrying a loaded weapon in a shopping bag, backpack or briefcase is, to me, the height of irresponsibility on the part of the owner.

Last weekend I was trying out some of my carry holsters out with Bitter, in an effort to find a carry method that worked better for her. I am not a big fan of the holster she uses, and wanted to get her something more practical for concealment, but I was surprised by how enormously difficult carry is for women when we were trying out my in-waist-band holsters. Women wear their pants higher on their bodies than men do, and my Glock was sticking into her ribs, which was uncomfortable for her. I don’t have that problem on me.

Purse carry is really the only option that’s going to work for a woman carrier consistently, and there are purses out there made specifically for this purpose. I don’t know if the commenter above would consider that irresponsible, but to suggest that purse carry is irresponsible is to condemn many women to being unarmed most of the time.

I don’t think purse carry or briefcase carry is really irresponsible, provided one takes precautions, and is aware of where the purse/briefcase/gun is at all times. I don’t carry a traditional briefcase, but a laptop bag that slings over the shoulder. I do not carry a gun in it, but this would be the type of bag you’d want to carry a firearm in. The chief thing you want to prevent is a snatch and run operation, so a shoulder strap, along with carrying the purse/case close to the body and firmly in your control is a must.

I understand the sentiment that the best place for a carry piece is on your immediate person, but that’s not possible for everyone, especially women. With proper care, there’s no reason for off body carry to be considered irresponsible. The problem with the whole Webb incident is that he seems to have overlooked the proper care part, not necessarily how he may or may not have been carrying.

Insty points to a blurb in regards to the Webb gun incident:

The reporter therefore asked, “Do you, senator, feel that you are above Washington, D.C.’s gun law?” Webb replied: “I’m not going to comment in any level in terms of how I provide for my own security.”

Truth be told, I wouldn’t answer this question either, and I don’t blame Webb for not answering it.   You never tell people when you are or aren’t carrying.  An appropriate response to a question along those lines is “None of your damned business,” so I think Webb’s comment in this regard is fine by me.  I would like him to be more forthcoming about how his aide ended up with the gun and whether it was his gun.  But I don’t believe he needs to answer questions about where and when he may or may not carry his side arm.  That’s his business, and he has good reasons for keeping it that way.

I ran across this video of some folks, at what appears to be a range outside the US, shooting the .577 Tyrannosaur:

You can find some background on the round here:

As A-Square loads the cartridge, it fires a 750-grain bullet at 2,460 feet per second, for muzzle energy of more than 10,000 foot-pounds. For the record, the case will hold 180 grains of H4831! No other company loads the cartridge or makes the brass, but since brass, bullets, and loaded ammunition are once again readily available from A-Square, securing a supply is less difficult than for many other big cartridges.

Jim Smith, the new owner of A-Square, says the first question anyone asks about the Tyrannosaur is “What’s the recoil like?” Since there are a couple of videos floating around the internet showing several people being thrown across a room when firing it, your long-suffering correspondent would like to assure you that it simply is not like that.

The Hannibal rifle employs Art Alphin’s “Coil-Chek” stock, which minimizes recoil in heavy cartridges through proper stock design rather than gadgets like muzzle brakes and recoil reducers. However, Art conceded the Tyrannosaur needed something more and put three reducers in the stock. So equipped, it weighs about 13 pounds.

10,000 ft-lbs of muzzle energy?   Holy recoil batman!  But hey, if your goal is a last ditch defense against a charging elephant, I’d wager you’d need every bit of it.  Now I really want to shoot one.

My friend Joy brought something back from Portland that I thought was really amusing. It’s called “Create a Commie”:

A pinko variation on Wooly Willy. Create your very own commie rat bastard, then shoot him. Well, OK, I haven’t done the last part yet. Don’t want to damage my pink carpet… or is that pinko carpet?

UPDATE: This company needs to get with the times.   I noticed they are missing Hugo Chavez.   For that matter Chavez needs to get some trademark hair style or facial hair so he can distinguish himself from his other role models.

… for having a concealed weapons permit when Diane Feinstein herself is a huge advocate of taking guns away from ordinary Americans. She’s apparently used her power in congress to make millions for her husband’s firm too.

Feinstein is and always has been a piece of garbage, and ought to do the honorable thing and resign. I don’t think she has an ounce of honor in her though, so I’m not expecting much.

I’m really glad the Democrats took over from those corrupt money grubbing Republicans, let me tell you. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

Tyler Cowen gives us a snippet from Benjamin Barber’s New Book “Consumed: How Markets Corrupt Children, Infantilize Adults, and Swallow Citizens Whole“:

There is actually [sic] a restaurant in New Jersey called Stuff Yer Face, and fast food generally is about stuffing your face: about nutrition, fueling up, taking in the calories, food as instrumentality, eaters as mere animals responding to biological imperatives.

I’m maybe 50 minutes away from New Brunswick. I think I will make it a point to go there so I can be infantalzed and swallowed whole. Their website has corrupted me into thinking their strombolis sound rather appetizing. I think washing it down with a beer, chosen from their large selection, is most definitely feeling like a biological imperative as well.

Thanks for the tip, Benjamin Barber. I’m always looking for new and fun places to eat. Stop by if you like.  I’ll buy you a beer.  Then explain to you the many ways you can go to hell for having the audacity to and gall to presume that your fellow citizens are nothing but a bunch of infants who can’t make rational decisions for themselves.

The gun blogosphere is pretty quiet today, so I thought I’d take some time to take a look at a new technology. While I’m a gun blogger normally, by training and profession I’m an engineer, so this will be a rare occasion when I get to use that skill in the blogosphere.

Instapundit points to a technology that claims to be able to make hydrogen from magnesium and water. This is interesting, but I consider this another example of a company cashing in on the alternate fuel craze. The big reason not to get excited about this is the second law of thermodynamics will always demand that you lose. You will need to put more energy into cleaving the water molecule into hydrogen and oxygen that you will ever get back from putting it back together either by burning it in a conventional internal combustion (IC) engine or fuel cell. In short, this system is essentially turning magnesium into an energy source, with hydrogen as an intermediary, to be turned into a usable form of energy in a fuel cell or IC engine. Interesting idea, but is magnesium cheap enough and sufficiently energy dense to be a practical motor fuel?

Magnesium seems to cost about $2.75 per kilogram. A kilogram of magnesium contains about 24.7 megajoules of energy. To compare to gasoline, we really need to measure energy by volume, which is 43 megajoules for a liter of of magnesium, compared to 34.6 megajoules for a liter of gasoline. Magnesium wins on energy density!

A liter of magnesium has a mass of 1.74 kilograms, and a cost of $4.79 based on recent pricing. It would take 1.24 liters of gasoline to have the same amount of energy that’s in a liter of magnesium. Gasoline in my area is about $2.60 a gallon, which comes out to about 69 cents per liter. Therefore the energy equivalent for gasoline comes out to cost 86 cents, compared to magnesium’s $4.79. So magnesium costs about five and a half times what gasoline does if you use equivalent energy.! If you do the unit conversions, to get the same amount of energy that’s in a gallon of gas, it would cost you $14.48. A little pricey for driving the kids to soccer practice, wouldn’t you say?

Also consider this is based on the current price of magnesium. No doubt common use of magnesium as a motor fuel would drive the price through the roof. Magnesium mining also requires energy, and is not exactly environmentally friendly.

So unless Ecotality has found a way to get around the second law of thermodynamics, this technology is a dead end. I’m sure the government would gleefully throw lots of grants (tax dollars) in their direction, but I certainly wouldn’t invest.

My source material was largely this Wikipedia article on energy density, plus a little Googling for prices. Someone go ahead and check my math if you want.

UPDATE: Glenn updated the article with a bit from a chemist who reveals where the energy is going in the process; making the elemental magnesium in the first place, and then recycling the oxides back into free metal.  If you submerge magnesium in water, it will react with the water as a matter of course, releasing hydrogen.   Didn’t know that.  My background isn’t in chemistry.   But the physics still says you lose.

Rick Perry has signed the no duty to retreat into law.  Texas is already one of the more friendly jurisdictions to lawful self-defense, and it just got friendlier.  Expect hysterical predictions from the media and gun control groups that will never come true.

I still have some Sheriffs to contact in the state to see whether they would release license information.  They only answer the phone during the day, and I have to work during the day.   Believe it or not, it’s easier to get on to make the quick post or comment than it is to get on the phone and call someone.  I wish all the Sheriffs had e-mail addresses, because I find that easy, but that doesn’t appear to be the case.  Kudos to Chester County Sheriff for being the only Sheriff’s Office in the area who appear to be living in the 21st century with the rest of us.

For some reason I find having to make a phone call during the day to be a lot more distracting to my work than computer related communication.  Anyone else feel that way too?

Despite the fact that I don’t look too highly on legislators placing themselves above the laws that apply to the rest of us, from Instapundit:

I agree that he seems to have broken the law. But it’s within a prosecutor’s discretion not to prosecute, and cases of inadvertence like this are often dropped — and should be. (It’s not clear that Thompson even knew the gun was in the bag.) Reader Larry Boykin thinks I’m an elitist (”So, it’s alright to have one set of laws for the common man and another set of laws for the ‘elite’? That’s what you are advocating if you believe that charges should be dropped. “) but I think that charges should be dropped for anyone in these circumstances. Would they be? Well, I don’t know. I know of some similar cases where ordinary people weren’t charged — but it’s true that they weren’t at the U.S. Capitol. If charges are dropped here under public scrutiny, of course, that’ll be an argument for treating ordinary people in similar circumstances similarly in the future.

I don’t think Glenn is an elitist. I agree that prosecutors should use discretion in cases like this, and I wouldn’t want to see anyone get the book thrown at them under similar circumstances, even if they were in Congress or were a staffer, just because they made an unknowing mistake (and who would knowingly put a briefcase on an x-ray machine if they knew they had a gun inside?).

I have no problem with shaming Jim Webb or his staffer for what appears to be carelessness. I have no problem with frowning on, or speaking out against politicians who carry guns in places the rest of us can’t, because they can get away with it, while we can’t.

But I can’t ignore the fact that I believe Washington D.C.’s gun laws are unconstitutional. I don’t want to see anyone prosecuted for a law that shouldn’t be on the books, whether they are an ordinary Joe, or whether they are Jim Webb. The constitution protects all of us, even politicians.

If we don’t like the idea of politicians flouting even unconstitutional laws that apply to the rest of us, and believe me, I don’t, we can remedy that at the voting booth.

UPDATE: Eugene Volokh suggests that Webb’s aide should not be charged because he may be flat out not guilty.

State Representative Paul Clymer, who wants to be everyone’s mom and dad, whether you asked for it or not, seems to have other pet issues that involve treating responsible adults in our Commonwealth like well cared for children:

Although Governor Rendell has signed legislation legalizing 61,000 slot machines in Pennsylvania, Clymer continues to lead an anti-gambling coalition in the Commonwealth. Made up of legislators, church, community and pro-family groups, the coalition seeks to have some oversight on casino gambling and is also working to repeal the gambling bill.

This is from his very own web site. OK folks, pay attention, because this will be one of those rare moments when I have something nice to say about Governor Rendell: he was right to loosen restrictions on gambling in Pennsylvania, not because they will pay for all the programs he wanted, or because they’ll pay for property tax relief. It’s clear now he was full of crap on that count. No, Governor Rendell was right to loosen restrictions on gambling because there’s no good reason for adults to be told how they can and can’t spend their own money. If the state can tax it and regulate it, why the hell not? Any extra money flowing into the treasury is welcome, and if people have a good time doing it, it’s a win win situation.

Representative Clymer should spend less time fighting Ed Rendell about how grown adults choose to spend their money and spend more time fighting Ed Rendell on his rampant tax and spend policies, his support for gun control, and support for a massive health care overhaul that will be damaging to businesses in the Commonwealth.

… to the list of Pennsylvania politicians who can go to hell. Why?

A bill introduced last week in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives would mandate that every car sold in the state be equipped with a breath testing device. State Representative Paul I. Clymer (R-Bucks County) insists that every motorist must prove that he is not drunk before starting a vehicle. Clymer’s proposal would require that, by 2009, all new cars sold in Pennsylvania have a device installed to estimate the amount of alcohol on the breath of a driver. If the machine believes the driver’s BAC is greater than .025 percent — significantly less than the legal limit of .08 percent — the car will not start.

So does that mean that Paul Clymer will give me a ride to work or pick me up on days when the interlock device decides to read a false positive, as they are prone to do sometimes? Paul Clymer obviously has no respect for the citizens of this Commonwealth, as he apparently believes we are all, even those of us who are responsible drinkers, or who don’t drink, such a risk to become drunk drivers that we have to be parented over by the state.

If Pennsylvania wants to retain educated young professionals, which everyone keeps saying we’re doing a sorry job of these days, then they need to make this bill die a very quick death, because it’s so bad, I’d likely leave the state over it, and go to a place like Arizona that treats people more like adults. If you live in Representative Clymer’s district, I urge you to vote against him in the next election, or if you’re a Republican, unseat him in the primaries. You deserve better representation than this.

Hat Tip: Nobody’s Business

Clayton Cramer does an excellent job tearing apart Brady Campaign President Paul Helmke’s latest statements against state pushing parking lot carry at work. I know I’ve come out against this bill for other reasons, but the Brady Campaign are still completely full of crap:

“This is not about personal freedom - getting shot in the workplace by someone who has retrieved a gun from the parking lot is the opposite of freedom,” said Paul Helmke, President of the Brady Campaign. “This is about preserving the ability of companies to make workplaces as safe as they can be, and free from gun violence.”

If I’m the kind of person who is going to go out to the car to get a gun to shoot someone, I’m not the kind of person who is going to give a crap about some HR policy. When are the Brady Campaign going to realize that rules and laws don’t stop these kinds of people? There is no policy that a company can make that will stop a employee who is intent on murder, save not hiring people with criminal histories in the first place.

While I don’t agree that employers should be forced to keep employees because they won’t respect the terms under which the employer agrees to continue their relationship, I absolutely agree that any HR department that thinks a no weapons policy does anything to stop workplace violence are as delusional as Paul Helmke.

Be sure to read Clayton’s entire post. It’s pretty good.

I’ve always heard for shooting corrosive ammo, the best thing to use for cleaning is soap and water. Straightarrow suggested ammonia solutions. Others have suggested Windex. After shooting the AK-74 in Texas, I tried Windex, and had no rust spots on the firearm. A few days ago I tried soapy water, and found the results to be less than pleasing, with rust splotches on the flash hider and in the gas tube. Windex would seem to win hands down.

But I doubt Windex is effective because of the ammonia. I think it has more to do with the fact that Windex has much more effective surfactants in it than plain soapy water. The ammonia is immaterial, other than its power as a detergent, which can be explained by the chemistry in the primers.

Corrosive primers contain mercury fulminate, which is strike sensitive, and an amalgam of potassium chlorate as an oxidizing agent, and rosin as a binding agent and fuel. The mercury fulminate gets the reaction going when the primer is struck by the firing pin, and gets hammered against the “anvil”. The potassium chlorate and rosin begin reacting violently to create a jet of hot, burning gas which then ignites the main powder charge. The problem with this reaction is that one of the byproducts is potassium chloride, which ends up on metal surfaces and attracts moisture, which quickly starts the corrosion process. The purpose of using warm water is to dissolve the potassium chloride, and wash it off of the gun. I suspect Windex works well because it has surfactants that will dig into the powder residue, get to the surfaces, and help wash away more of the potassium salt.

Another by product of of the primer reaction is elemental mercury, which can form amalgams with brass. If you ever wondered why the Soviets use steel cased ammo, this is one of the reasons. Over time, mercuric primers can leech enough mercury into the casing to weaken the brass, increasing the risk of rupture when it’s fires. Using steel casings minimizes this risk, even with very old ammunition.

Modern non-corrosive primers use lead syphnate, which doesn’t leave moisture attracting salts. The lead syphnate is bound up with ground glass as a frictionator, tetracene as a sensitizer, along with an oxidizing compound, typically barium nitrate, and a fuel source, such as antimony sulfide.

Non-corrosive primers are more prone to degradation than corrosive primers, in large part because tetracene makes the primer a lot more heat sensitive. There have been a lot of advancements in primer technology lately, particularly with non-toxic primers, and I won’t pretend to be an expert on this.

But I will say that Windex is definitely your friend if you shoot corrosive primed surplus ammunition out of your firearms. It seems to get the job done better than soapy water.

The Jim Webb stuff is getting interesting just as I have to concentrate on stuff at work. Instapundit and SayUncle are on top of it. I agree that Webb should get on the repeal DC gun ban issue pronto. Some reciprocity would be nice too.

UPDATE: Should have been more clear.  I don’t actually want Congress to derail Parker by repealing the ban either.  I would like Senator Webb to acknowledge that the ban is an injustice to ordinary citizens and that he is against it, or something along those lines.

Ed Rendell is crapping all over Keystone State gun collectors again:

Speaking on a day when Philadelphia recorded its third gun killing in 24 hours, Rendell said that if lawmakers’ terms were limited, they might be less fearful of the gun lobby and more likely to support a long-stalled proposal to limit handgun purchases to one a month.

“That law should be passed,” Rendell said. “No one who is sane and rational would vote against one handgun a month.”

I guess I’m crazy them, because as a collector, this law will affect me. And I still ask “How is this going to help things?”. They’ve been completely unable to demonstrate that this kind of straw purchasing is a major source of crime guns. Straw purchasing is already illegal, and multiple gun sales are tracked by the ATF and County Sheriffs. If we’re not going after these types of gun traffickers now, how is adding an extra law going to help anything?

I should also point out that term limits will ensure that Ed Rendell does not serve a second term as Pennsylvania’s governor. I guess they are useful for something then.

h/t: Jeff Soyer

I won’t really say anything more about the Webb incident, because now that the details are coming out, we’re missing a key bit of information to determine whether this is something I really should be upset about or not.  Initial reports made it seem like Webb was bringing a gun into the Capitol, and mistakingly handed the bag with guns in it off to a staffer.  This would upset me, because I don’t take kindly to politicians privileging themselves with activities they’d throw me in the slammer for.  I can’t carry in DC without risking jail time, it should be the same for Senators.

If Webb was boarding a flight, he may not have been breaking any laws, as the airports are both in Virginia, except BWI, which is in Maryland.  If he handed a bag off to the staffer without telling the staffer there was a gun in it, he was an idiot, but it’s not something I’m going to get too worked up over.  It’s politicians holding themselves above the law that I get worked up over.

So I’ll reserve my indignation from the time being, and just leave it at this: I still won’t be impressed until I see Webb carrying a P90 under a trench coat.