Snowflakes in Hell

Here’s another reason if you have an LTC in Pennsylvania, and somewhere around six to seven hundred thousand of us do, you ought to be carrying all the time.   Robberies are always a sticky issue, because often it’s just better to let them go down.   But when you have nervous people pointing guns at other human beings, there’s always a chance for tragedy.

The amount of pant shitting hysterics in this Guardian piece would be sufficient to fertilize an entire field of soybeans.  It’s about Florida’s castle doctrine law.

Fred Thompson has more to say about the horrific murders in Newark that I blogged about here.

We will start this continuing series with Pennsylvania going from a “may-issue” discretionary issue state, to a shall-issue state. Prior to Act 158, the law read something like this:

Issue of License.–The Chief or Head of any police fore or department of a city, and elsewhere the Sheriff of a County, may, upon the application of any person, issue a license to such person to carry a firearm in a vehicle or concealed on or about his person within this commonwealth for not more than five years from the date of issue, if it appears that the applicant has good reason to fear an injury to his person or property, or has any other proper reason for carrying a firearm, and that he is a suitable person to be licensed.

Act 158 was actually a child welfare bill, that had right to carry attached to it. It fundamentally altered the licensing language to say:

Grant or Denial of License.–Upon the receipt of an application for the license to carry a firearm, the sheriff shall, within 45 days, issue or refuse to issue a license on the basis of the investigation under subsection (d) and the accuracy of the information contained in the application. If the sheriff refuses to issue a license, the sheriff shall notify the applicant in writing of the refusal and the reason. The notice shall be sent by certified mail to the applicant at the address set fourth in the application.

This basically made the state shall issue.  Subsection D spells out the conditions that one must meet to qualify for a license, and they are objective, for the most part.   But, there was a catch:

 (2) In a City of the First Class, a license shall be issued only if it additionally appears that the applicant ahs good reason to fear an injury to the applicant’s person or property, or has any other proper reason for carrying a firearm and that the applicant is a suitable individual to be licensed.

Philadelphia is the only city of the first class in the Commonwealth.  Act 158 specifically exempted Philadelphia from the right-to-carry requirement, and allowed the city to continue to refuse to issue gun licenses to anyone they didn’t sufficiently like.

Act 158 also made provision for sportsman’s permits, for carrying a firearm while hunting, in addition to strengthening the state’s preemption to include ammunition and ammunition components.

I’m really glad to hear that Ryan got to talk to Ted Nugent for a bit while he’s in town.  I voted for The Nuge for the NRA board, and I’m glad to see he’s holding up his end of the bargain.

Eric has a pretty good read over at Classical Values.  I’m always impressed with the depth that he looks into issues, especially in regards to our area.   In this article, he’s looking at a recent murder in a Chinese owned grocery; a robbery gone sour.

Wyatt Earp also has some thoughts on it.

I’m having to split stuff I find between here and SayUncle, so posts on here won’t be as heavy for the week.  Later today, my series on Pennsylvania’s Uniform Firearms Act will continue.

I have to admit that I chuckled reading Robb’s post here, because it’s true.  I think it’s because we all go through that awkward phase when we first start shooting, where we’re trying out a lot different things and figuring out what works and what doesn’t.   Perhaps some people never really get beyond that awkward phase.

I myself have a tricked out HiPoint 9mm Carbine that I never shoot anymore.  I’ts from the awkward phase, complete with all the things Robb mentions, except that it doesn’t have particularly good optics.  I quickly figured out all the gadgety crap didn’t really help with the fundamentals of shooting, so I shed it.  I couldn’t shoot for shit then, and sometimes I can’t shoot for shit now.  But I’m better than I was.  I have a few guns I shoot regularly with optics, but I generally stay with iron sights.

This past Friday I took the PSL out to the range to shoot some 7.62×54 goodness at 100 yards.  The target was a standard 100 yard large bore rifle target.  I landed 3 in the 10 ring, 3 in the 9, two in the 8 and 2 in the 7, for a total of 87/100.  I’m not one to be satisfied with a B when I’m shooting a rifle with optics!  I’ve never been able to shoot the PSL all that well.  I do much better with small bore shooting, which means I need to learn to be better at managing recoil.  The PSL dishes out recoil in spades.  It’s also difficult to shoot if you wear glasses, because of the rubber eyepiece on the Soviet era optics doesn’t fit nicely over glasses.   I have a tendency to wince or flinch when shooting the PSL.  The flash from the mighty 7.62×54R fills the entire scope if you shoot it right.  Good rule of thumb is, if you see flash, you probably didn’t flinch.  I’m getting better at shooting this rather large rifle, but I won’t be happy until I can get all my shots in the nine and ten ring.