Snowflakes in Hell

Ahab and Uncle point out that when a deranged police officer goes on a rampage, it’s a police-style rifle, not a high-powered baby killing assault rifle.

David Hardy notes that the silence from the anti-gun community over this whole incident is deafening.  Not surprising.   It would interfere with their narrative that all the specialized firearms training that they claim police officers get makes them immune from the same human failings as the rest of us, and thus they can be trusted with guns, while the rest of us cannot.

If you want to know why I think police need to stick with us gun nuts?  This is the reason:

That said, there appears to be far greater leniency with respect to the carrying, and use, of weapons by members of law enforcement in this country than is desirable.

Interestingly, as you know, police officers in Great Britain don’t carry guns, and that country has a much lower incidence of violent crime.

These people have absolutely no regard for officer safety at all.  They will put the lives of our police officers in jeopardy in order to quell their irrational fear.  They do not understand the nature of police work, nor do they care to.

Off duty carry is important for an officer’s safety, because the bad guys don’t have any concept of “off duty”.  5:00 doesn’t roll around and they suddenly become respectable family men.  If they get our guns, they will come restrict police guns next.  It’s not about fighting crime, it’s about feeding an irrational fear.

Hat tip to SayUncle

Dave Hardy and Clayton Cramer were in attendance and are blogging about it.  Clayton also talks about some scary encounters with Ron Paul supporters.  I’ll admit,  don’t really get the cult of Ron Paul either.  Granted, the guy is great on the gun issue, but I think hugging him is actually going a bit overboard.

I don’t like any politician that much.

I came across this sad story on Pennsylvania Firearms Owners Association forum. A guy seeking advise about renewing an expired PA License to Carry Firearms. Seems he got into a bit of hot water with the law, under this Pennsylvania law:

Title 18, Section 1.4(a) of the unconsolidated statutes.

§ 1.4. Altered or illegally obtained property; penalty.

(a) Alteration or destruction of vehicle identification number.–Any person who alters, counterfeits, defaces, destroys, disguises, falsifies, forges, obliterates or removes a vehicle identification number with the intent to conceal or misrepresent the identity or prevent the identification of a motor vehicle or motor vehicle part commits a felony of the third degree and, upon conviction, shall be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than seven years or a fine of not more than $50,000, or both.

That’s a felony. Clearly this individual must have been involved in some sort of criminal ring. Right? Well, here’s his story:

I bought 2 cars, one from maryland the other from new york. the person i got the maryland car from got it from an auction in deleware. He never transfered it to maryland and kept it for 3 years. I bought it brought it home and could not get the title transfered. tried contacting the auction house in deleware but out of buisness. so i could not get the title transfered. the newyork car was wrecked but had a good motor and interior. the maryland car did not. the vin was attached to the dash, not to the car it’s self. so when I replaced the maryland cars riped upi dash with the nice shiney newyork car dash the vin went with it cause it was rivited to the dash. you get the picture. I called everywhere to find out what to do and every dmv or berriks I called told me to call the other guy. so basicly I am screwed because state employees of pa,maryland and delaware don’t know the jobs. A victim of circomstance (i know my spelling is bad haha) that my luck.

So he installed the dash from one car into another, and forgot the transfer the VIN number. He got caught, and apparently some turd of a District Attorney decided to throw the book at him, either for the safety of society, or to bolster his legal career, I’m sure you can guess which one. The poor guy runs out of money to pay attorneys, and ends up getting pressured to cop a guilty plea in exchange for a year of probation. Only problem; no one advised him he was surrendering his firearms rights.

I am not opposed to the idea that people convicted of certain crimes of violence can have their right to own a firearm removed. But this whole incident illustrates why this idea has become a mockery of justice. This man was wrongly charged, was pressured to plead guilty by an ambitious DA who was more concerned with his conviction record than justice, and now has been screwed out of an important constitutional right.

Fortunately, he says he currently doesn’t own any firearms, which is good. I’d hate for him to twice be a victim of the justice system. If organizations like the Brady Campaign want to be serious about keeping guns out of the hands of dangerous people, and want us to stand with them, they have to condemn applications like this. Otherwise it’s just another means of harassment, and it’s wrong.