Snowflakes in Hell

Contact Wal-Mart corporate headquarters here.  Select “Feedback” then “Corporate Office”.  Let them know you’re unhappy that they signed a deal with Bloomberg.  Keep in mind you’re likely communicating with someone who has no idea what Bloomberg’s mayor coalition is all about, so make sure to explain in brief.  Here’s what I sent:

Dear Sir or Madam,

It was with great regret that I read Wal-Mart has signed an agreement with New York City Mayor Bloomberg’s coalition of “Mayors Against Illegal Guns”.  Despite the name of the Mayor’s organization, it is has advocated policies that would infringe on the second amendment rights of Americans, not merely go after the criminal trafficking of firearms.  The existing federal and state regulations, enforced by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, which Wal-Mart is legally bound to obey as a condition of retaining its Federal Firearms License, are more than adequate for the purposes of being a responsible corporate citizen when it comes to selling firearms and ammunition.  It was entirely unnecessary for Wal-Mart to concede anything to Mayor Bloomberg’s group.

Because this deal is an affront to myself and gun owners everywhere, I regret that I will take all my purchases for firearms and ammunition elsewhere.  Wal-Mart may have great prices for shooting supplies, but there is no price that I’m willing to assign my second amendment rights.

Sincerely,

[Sebastian]
Langhorne, PA

It was hard to write that, because I really wanted to tell them where they can shove their smiley faced low prices after handing a propaganda coup like that to that jackass Bloomberg.  But anger is seldom persuasive.  Needless to say, I now have a very strong preference for Target, and you can bet your butt I won’t be sticking up for Wal-Mart again when the hippies come bitching about them about not paying a living wage, or providing adequate health care to employees.

Lower Chichester Township, in Delaware County, Pennsylvania, not far from where I grew up, has just provided us with a fantastic example of why preemption is one of the fundamental principles that gun rights advocates won’t compromise on.  As soon as one town passes its own local gun rules, a dozen other towns with anti-gun politicians pile on.  Pretty soon you can’t travel the state to shoot, hunt, or keep or bear a firearm for self-protection without running the risk of unknowlingly becoming a criminal.

While the anti-gun folks keep telling us these local restrictions are reasonable, and that it will only limit itself to big cities with crime problems, experience suggests otherwise.  A patchwork of legal regulations makes gun ownership legally risky, and traveling to shoot or hunt nearly impossible without running afoul of one law or another, and that’s exactly the idea.

From The White Peril:

My mother has two handguns and takes shooting lessons because my father works nights quite a bit. If someone broke into the house, she’d have to fend for herself until the township police arrived. That’s been a fact of life since long before manufacturing jobs started leaving.

Read the whole thing.  This guy is from my neck of the woods, in Southeastern, PA, which pundits tell us is outside of Pennsylvania’s God and Guns country.  One wonders what Obama thinks my reason, given that I’m not religious, and economically well off, for clinging to guns is?  Maybe because politicians like him don’t seem to want to quit advocating they be taken away.

Hat tip to Eric

This basically means I will never buy any firearm related product from Wal-Mart again.  Ever.  Wal-Mart was my source for shotgun ammo, and the occaisional box or two of 9mm.  Now my business will go elsewhere, rather than to corporate cowards.

This law could be the bane of dirty old men in malls in the State of Maine.  Dr. Helen talks about whether this law, which basically seems to outlaw staring at children, won’t have unintended consequences.  Here’s my scenario:

A man is caught starting into a park with a set of binoculars where children are known to be congregating.  Surely that’s enough to creep out any parent who might come across it?  The police are called, and arrest the man for “visual sexual aggression”, in the face of a crowd of angry parents demanding something be done.  The man, a member of the local ornithological society, claims he was tracking a rare Rufous-capped Warbler.  The police don’t buy it, and he’s arrested and charged.  He’s ultimately acquitted in a jury trial, but the legal fees force him into bankruptcy, and he loses his life’s savings.

People need to develop a healthy skepticism of what those in power suggest will protect their children.  Legislators can pass laws.  That’s all they can do.  When your only tool is a hammer, a lot of things start looking like nails.  Voters need to consider that the legal system can ruin the lives of the guilty along with the innocent.  The reason I oppose this Maine law is the exact same reason I opposed the “Lost and Stolen” requirement.  We set the state’s burden of proof high for a reason, and we should look most skeptically on any proposal designed to allow the state to divine that a person clearly must be guilty, and to give the state tools to make an easy conviction based on that cognition, without having to meet the burden of proof for the more serious, but more difficult to prove offense.

UPDATE: Illspirit points out that the actual bill is not nearly what the reporter has lead us to believe.  After reading the actual text, I have no problem with said bill.  It only goes to show you should never believe anything you hear from a reporter.

After being called a gun clinging, Jesus loving xenophobe by Barack Obama, I can’t take too much exception to being called a yahoo, but speaking as someone who comes from a state that has no restrictions on carrying in restaurants, or even in bars, I don’t see what the issue is here.  Pennsylvania generally has few problems in this area, regardless.

It’s also a little disingenuous to link Uncle’s support of a local gun shop, which had to restrict carriage on the range because of “cold range” rules mandated by insurance requirements, to a government restriction which could land violaters in jail.

If you’re opposed to concealed carry, then oppose concealed carry.  But if it’s going to be allowed, it’s in society’s interest that there be as few restrictions on time and place as can be afforded.  The result of many restrictions is firearms left in vehicles, which is an invitation to thieves.  Tennessee’s law disallows a concealed carry holder from consuming alcohol wile carrying, which I think is reasonble.  The onus should be on those opposing it for why the restriction is justified.  Most reasonable people would agree that drinking and driving do not mix, yet we do not restrict people with car keys from entering eating establishments because they might have too much to drink.  A free and confident society trusts its citizens to do the right thing, and I don’t think we have too much evidence that permit holders are the kinds of people who won’t.

Apparently Hillary now has a 20 point lead over Obama.  It was a dead heat last week.  Pennsylvanians like their guns and God, and are fairly non-bitter people, unless, of course, some pompus ass of a politician from Chicago tries to tell us we are.  Then you will see the bitterness flow.

Howard Nemerov has an interesting article on Newsbusters over the reported increase in traces of AK-47s.  I would also add that there are more firearms that are not AK type rifles that use the 7.62×39mm Soviet round, including the SKS, and a few sporting guns.  So if they are using data based on caliber, they may or may not be AK-47s.

Howard will be on Cam & Company tonight at 10:40 to discuss his article.

In addition to the money utterly wasted persuing this illegal gun ban, where the conclusion is virtually foredrawn that the city will lose in court, gun shops are talking about moving, causing the city to lose tax revenue from shops that sell a high dollar value item:

Delia predicted panic buying of guns, but also warned that if the laws were upheld in court, “I would consider moving out of the city.”

But he wouldn’t stop selling guns to people living in Philadelphia. He said he would move his store to a more gun-friendly town across the city line and resume his business.

Not smart for a city struggling with money.

Lou Middleton, 65, a former Philadelphia police officer who was passing time in Delia’s store, called the city’s new gun laws “a bunch of b.s., to put it bluntly.”

Middleton, who lives in Northeast Philadelphia, said he collects guns, including old military firearms. “I have an M1A [rifle], which has a 20 clip, which cost me $2,000,” he said. “Are they going to come and take it?”

They might, when the enforcement period begins.  We might win in court eventually, but you’ll probably never see your rifle again.

I’m not going to condemn the owners for wanting to put this whole mess behind them, but we can’t really make this farce pay for Bloomberg either.

Ahab would be pleased to hear this story:

Prendergast carried the revolver with the first two chambers unloaded as a safety measure, and as a backup also had a small 0.22 caliber automatic pistol hidden inside his flight suit. When a rescue helicopter and support aircraft showed up, strafing drove off all the North Vietnamese except the guards, who felt safer staying with Prendergast than running for cover.

This proved a fatal mistake. While the two North Vietnamese were distracted by the noise and confusion, Prendergast pulled out the little automatic, cocked it, and shot the militiaman with the rifle in the head. The other militiaman tried to shoot Prendergast with the revolver, only to find that the hammer fell on an empty cylinder, and was shot himself an instant later. Prendergast swam out to the rescue helicopter and was retrieved.

It’s all about shot placement.

Using writing from bloggers without permission in a commercial promotion?  Not cool.  I have a training certificate from Front Sight that I have no intention of using.  A little more than a year ago they were offering them to bloggers in exchange for setting up some links, and I bit without doing any research.  Since then I’ve uncovered a lot of very negative information about Front Sight, which is making me ponder returning the certificate, with a letter explaining that I no longer want to participate in this scam.

Apparently he’ll be announcing tomorrow.  Looks like this is in preperation to run for president on the Constitution Party ticket.  I got to listen to him talk at the Rally in Harrisburg last Monday, and he’s quite a speaker.

This should give you an idea of what ordinary police officers (you know, the ones that catch criminals rather than play politician in a police uniform) think about Nutter’s latest plan.

Because when you’re cleared of any wrongdoing in a self-defense case, the scumbag ought not be able to sue you.