Snowflakes in Hell

I have to say, I think this is poetic justice, but I agree with Greg that the party is pretty much free to ignore primary results if they so wish.  The primary system was one of those progressive reforms to take the power of nominating candidates out of the proverbial smoke filled rooms filled with party bosses, but the party is still a non-governmental entity, and is free to choose to punish state delegations that don’t follow the rules.

We live in a society where both parties, but Democrats in particular, hold up democratic rule as our greatest aspiration.  To quote Barack Obama’s spiritual mentor, “The chickens are coming home to roost.”

Keyboard and a .45 talks about the importance of downstream candidates for state and local races.  This can’t really be stressed enough.  Even if you completely hate McCain, and can’t bring yourself to vote for him, there are still a lot of candidates on the ballot who deserve support.  We’re seriously looking at the possibility of a fillibuster proof majority Democratic controlled Senate, and a Democrat controlled house.  That’s not even mentioning all the states that could go to the Democrats.   Remember in 2010 you have the census, which allows the resdistricting monster to rear its ugly head.  This is definitely no time to just stay home.

The whole gay cootie thing is a loser issue.  Republicans are going to need to find a way to appeal to religious voters without bashing on gays politically.  It’s one thing to be against gay marriage, even Democrats aren’t coming out in favor of that, but it’s another thing to suggest we need to change our constitution because of what the queers are doing to the soil.  If we lose the next generation of voters to the Democrats, we’re royally screwed, especially if they are going to keep nominating candidates like Barack Obama.

UPDATE: This doesn’t seem like a good idea either.

Wyatt points out a rather good article in Townhall about police shootings.  This stuff applies to anyone who has to use a firearm in self-defense.  Police aren’t the only ones that get subject to 20/20 hindsight by people who don’t know much about these matters, so go have a read.

Tom King, President of New York State Rifle and Pistol Assocation, has a post up debunking Microstamping, which is in real danger of passing in New York State.  They’ve been able to hold off new gun control in New York thanks to a Republican controlled senate, but after 2008, there’s a real danger of the state sinking into the gun control abyss if the Democrats regain control.  We briefly interviewed Tom at the Annual Meeting after Governor Patterson announced his “screw gun owners” legislative agenda:

Doug Pennington is an employee of the Brady Campaign, and I’m pretty sure the guy who does the Brady Campaign blog on Paul’s behalf.  As Thirdpower points out, he’s been commenting at The Huffington Post.  Here’s what he says in one of his comments:

One thing: I’ve read comments off and on over the months on the blog, and one reason I (and I suspect others) choose not to get between the warring sides here is that nobody listens to anybody. Commenters here seem to be good at the schoolyard taunts and calling each other “liars,” etc, though. A few do seem to have arguments at the ready and numbers to go along with them - on both sides. (If I can make it through the drek, I can actually learn things.) Almost nobody, though, shows a sense that they may not actually have all the answers. Get in the middle of a bunch of know-it-alls convinced of their correctness? Disagree and be called a liar? Spend hours going tit-for-tat in a pointless spiral? Uh, no thanks….

Welcome to the Internet, Doug.  I agree that once you get beyond the first couple of iterations of comment-reply-comment, it goes downhill pretty quickly.  So I’ll extend an open invitation to Doug to have a public discussion with him on this blog regarding any gun control related topic he may want to talk about.  The discussion could happen over a series of e-mails, with the end result being published here.  No Kelli, no Macca, No Thirdpower, no Kaveman.  Just Doug and myself.

Think they’ll take me up on it?

Thanks to Paul Helmke for pointing out a new, or at least new to me, anti-gun blog.  Since the good reverend is clinging to God, but not guns, one wonders whether she’s still one of Obama’s “bitter” ones.  But regardless, it appears that the blog allows comments.  I haven’t tried to place one yet, but I’m going to guess “heavily moderated.”  Just a hunch.  Can’t have too much reasoned discourse now, can we?  But proceed respectually and factually, as I know our commenters are wont to do.  Engage the good reverend, and let the reasoned discourse flow.

Actual text of the bill is here.  Basically it allows you to verbally announce you’re armed to an attacker, allows a transition from concealed to open carry when under threat of physical force (not necessarily deadly physical force).  It also would appear to allow you to draw into the ready position under threat of physical force.  Based on a quick review of Arizona’s criminal statutes, it doesn’t appear to be unlawful to draw a gun on someone as long as you’re justified in using deadly force, even if you don’t have to shoot.  Arizona’s self-defense statute would appear to remove self-defense as a justification if you are responsible for escalating the confrontation.  So a question I would have is, if you draw one someone threatening physical force (not deadly physical force), and they don’t back down, then what?  They are threatening physical force, you’re threatening deadly physical force.  If you end up shooting him, do you lose justification?

First I’ve heard of this is from Dustin’s blog.  If he had succeeded in carrying out his mass shooting, any doubt this would have made national headlines?  Also of note that in most states, bars are gun free zones.  In Nevada, they are not.  Yet somehow, someone managed to think clearly and take action, at a place where we’re told that people won’t act responsibly.

And it doesn’t register as a blip on the national news.

… some sharp objects to be allowed back on planes.  Some experts agree with the move, arguing they should be concentrating on finding explosives.  Like coffee creamer?

According to Dave Hardy, Napolitano has vetoed two gun bills.  The first:

Gov. Janet Napolitano vetoed legislation Tuesday which would have allowed individuals to draw their weapons in cases where a reasonable person would believe it is necessary to protect against the use or attempted use of physical force.

I have to say, I agree with the governor on this one.  Unless you’re justified in using deadly force, your gun should stay in its holster.  For situations like the one described here:

“You wait ’til the big 6-foot-5, 280-pound guy knocks you on the ground and incapacitates you before you can tell him, ‘I’ve got a gun,’ ” he said.

“If that big guy threatens you, the next thing is he’s going to hit you,” Pearce explained, at which point “it’s too late to say anything.” He said Napolitano missed the whole point of the bill.

There’s already force disparity defenses to deal with that situation if you have to use deadly force on someone much larger than you, even if the offending party doesn’t have a weapon.  Fists can be considered deadly weapons under some circumstances.  One reason I think carrying OC [self-defense spray] is a good idea is because it’s useful for getting out of a physical altercation where deadly force wouldn’t be justified.  While I agree with eliminating duties to retreat, allowing people to bring deadly force into a situation that has not yet escalating into that grave a situation seems like a bad idea.

The other bill Nepolitano vetoed was this:

Napolitano separately vetoed another measure Tuesday which would have made state-issued permits to carry a concealed weapon valid for the owner’s lifetime.

Little reason to veto this, since most state law enforcement agencies are monitoring criminal records of license holders and will revoke if you do something that makes you unqualified.  The renewal is just a hoop to jump through so everyone can feel better.

UPDATE: It seems I may be misunderstanding Arizona law here.  In Pennsylvania, we have no law against brandishing a firearm.  If you pull a gun on someone, and don’t use it, you’re not liable if the bad guy beats a retreat or backs down, as long as the circumstances that caused you to draw was a deadly force situation.  Folks are suggesting that’s not the case in Arizona.  If Arizona law does punish for drawing, but not shooting, then that would seem to be something that should be fixed.

UPDATE: After looking at Arizona Revised Statutes on Justification, I’m not sure I was misunderstanding it.  I have more information and questions here.

The opening up of a new ATF field office is such the headliner event that Frank Lautenberg feels the need to keep his party crashing opponent away from all the glory.  I hate New Jersey politics, and fail to understand why people there tolerate it.  Truth be told, I don’t like Rob Andrews politically, but I like people who don’t play by the rules, especially in New Jersey, where the rules are rigged to favor the powerful.

If I were a special interest in New Jersey, and party hacks told me not to donate to Andrew’s campaign, or there’d be hell to pay, I’d max out on him just as a fuck you for such arrogance and presumption.

SayUncle covers the machinations of Tom Eblen, who apparently wants to believe AHSA is not a sham, no matter what the facts say.  Bob Ricker recently came back on Bitter’s site to remind us that NRA’s endorsement isn’t worth crap, and that their organization helped Claire McCaskill beat Jim Talent in Missouri, so take that you self-defense wackos.  Of course, they also endorsed Obama, who then proceeded to lose in Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Indiana, and Kentucky — states with a lot of gun owning Democrats.  So I think it’s fair to question whether AHSA’s endorsement is really worth anything.

I first became aquainted with the knife rights movement at the annual meeting last year in St. Louis, and took one of their buttons.  I don’t see any reason why knives shouldn’t be considered personal arms, protected by the second amendment, and Pennsylvania’s right to bear arms provision.  Joe Huffman has a pretty good post up about this here.

Pennsylvania’s knife laws are, for the most part, fairly lax, but our state law prohibits switchblades:

Pa. C.S.A. 18.908. Prohibited offensive weapons.

(a) Offense defined.–A person commits a misdemeanor of the first degree if, except as authorized by law, he makes, repairs, sells, or otherwise deals in, uses, or possesses any offensive weapon.

(b) Exception.– It is a defense under this section for the defendant to prove by a preponderance of evidence that he possessed of dealt with the weapon solely as a curio or in a dramatic performance, or that he possessed it briefly in consequence of having found it or taken it from an aggressor, or under circumstances similarly negativing any intent or likelihood that the would be used unlawfully.

(c) Definition.–As used in this section, the following words and phrases shall have the meanings given to them in this subsection:

“Firearm.” — Any weapon which is designed to or may readily be converted to expel any projectile by the action of an explosive or the frame or receiver of any such weapon.
“Offensive weapons.” — Any bomb, grenade, machine gun, sawed-off shotgun with a barrel less than 18 inches, firearm specially made or specially adapted for concealment or silent discharge, any blackjack, sandbag, metal knuckles, dagger, knife, razor or cutting instrument, the blade of which is exposed in an automatic way by switch, push-button, spring mechanism, or otherwise, or other implement for the infliction of serious bodily injury which serves no common lawful purpose.

There’s an exception for law enforcement, and for people who have complied with the requirements of the National Firearms Act for the firearms provisions.  State law allows for carriage of a knife as big as you want, as long as it’s not a switchblade.  The only problem is, there’s no preemption for knives, so local ordinances can apply.

It’s a silly law.  A knife is no more dangerous because it is actuated by a button or spring mechanism than if I can open it with one hand, but case law in Pennsylvania has ruled that a knife that can be flicked open by wrist action after releasing a lock is not covered by this law.

Looks like Clayton Cramer didn’t manage to unseat his opponent in the primary.  Looking at the results, looks like it was within about 750 votes, out of 3100 or so total.  It’s very difficult to unseat an incumbent.  Still, if you want to have an impact on politics in your area, primaries are a place where a lot of difference can be made with little effort, since turnout is often pretty low.  As we demonstrated in Pennsylvania in our 2007 primary, you can affect considerable turnover in the primary if voters are properly motivated.  Sometimes, your side doesn’t win, but you get back on the horse and try again.  Eventually, you’ll win a few.

Gunpundit has an example of what other countries are doing to gun owners.   Look at the firearms laid out in the path of the steam roller.   Do they look like guns that were seized from rebel groups?  Or do they look like ordinary household guns that might be used to take game, and defend families?

Color me skeptical about this one.  A sawed off shotgun I can believe, since all it takes to get one of those is a regular shotgun and a hacksaw. But an RPG?  We’ve seen this in the media before, and bloggers were able to identify it as an inert tube.  It’s possible, I suppose, that someone had an RPG, but I’m guessing this is another case of some kind of munition looking thing that’s inert.

Bensalem is the next township over from me, but upon cleaning out my attic this weekend from previous owners crap, I didn’t find any fun toys like this.  Bummer.  But had I found an RPG, I would not have endangered any police or first responders.  No, definitely not.  I’m sure I could have found a cooperative junk yard owner, preferably in a secluded area, where such ordnance could be safely and properly disposed of, without endangering anything except perhaps a late model Chevrolet Celebrity.  Or maybe a Ford Escort.

No, really.

“Today we’re having a conversation on whether an SKS 47 (photo)  should not be banned from use in the city of Philadelphia. Can you imagine having a conversation, having to fight back a challenge to some who would say that that should be okay, we should not ban that weapon.”

Click on the article, and see the picture, which features a Kalashnikov type rifle, and an SKS type rifle.  I’m not sure which one is an SKS 47.  These idiots don’t even have any clue what they are talking about banning.

He says there’s no proof that gun control solves any problems.  This is something Philadelphians desperately need to hear.  The politicians already know this, but they are hoping their constituents don’t, and as long as they can keep blaming Harrisburg, they don’t have to answer for their own failures.  Kudos for Dr. Lott for getting the message out there in our toxic media environment.

Brent Greer informs us that there’s about to be an important vote in Ohio on CCW improvements.  I like what I see:

The amendment provides a legal way for a person who does not have a concealed handgun license to transport an unloaded firearm in a motor vehicle. It allows a concealed handgun licensee to pick up a child from school, to carry a concealed firearm in one’s own home without a license, to carry concealed in places such as grocery stores that sell alcohol for off-site consumption, to carry concealed in publicly-owned facilities such as park shelters, parking garages, and highway rest stop buildings, and to carry in an unlocked, closed glove compartment or center console.

I carried in Ohio on my way to the NRA Annual Meeting, but rest stops are posted because they are public buildings.  I’m pretty sure someone intent on mugging someone at a rest area isn’t paying much attention to the posting.  This looks like a major improvement to Ohio’s carry laws.

Apparently 11 billion miles less in March this year than last year.  We’re also producing less carbon emissions.  Funny how the free market works like that.  I’m anxiously awaiting advanced in battery technology, which appears to be close to fruition, that will allow me to forgo gasoline entirely, and plug my car in at the end of the day.  Take that Saudi Arabia!

Over at Traction Control.

Thirdpower reports some problems with how the Brady Campaign is representing the Illinois FOID card.  The gun control crowd would be happy to pass licensing in other states, and will tell you it’s a “reasonable measure” and is “common sense.”  Illinois already has it, but apparently it’s not enough.  Is it any wonder we think the goal is just to make owning a gun so difficult that no one bothers?  Then, it’ll be “common sense” and “reasonable” to just ban them altogether.

Mixing explosives, blowing things up, and precision shooting, all in one place?  I would love to go to Joe’s gun blogger day at Boomershoot, but it’ll hinge on the employment situation, which looking into April of 2009 might be a bit untenable if the company I work for runs out of money.

Accidents involving firearms on shooting ranges are rare, but The Arizona Rifleman has some tips just in case.  Most accidents don’t involve someone getting shot, but you might remember my friend Jason had his M950 blow up on him once.  It’s not common, but it does happen.  The worst injury I’ve ever gotten on the range was putting a staple through my finger tacking a target up to the cardboard target holder.