comments in () by the same
http://ww.spw-duf.info
:
The Beat Winds Down?: In the past few years, as the U.S. economy
faltered, demand for firearms skyrocketed: People worried that high
unemployment would lead to an increase in crime. Then, when President
Obama was elected, gun rights supporters feared that the new
administration would clamp down on their right to bear arms, which
lead to another gun sales spike. But both of those fears have eased,
and demand for guns and ammunition is weakening. The FBI's National
Instant Criminal Background Check System was used for 1.30 million
background checks in March 2010, down from 1.34 million a year
earlier, according to the National Shooting Sports Foundation. In
2008, there was an 18% increase, and in the month after Obama's
election, background checks skyrocketed by 42%. Obama was even named
"Gun Salesman of the Year" by one pundit… Meanwhile, the firearms and
munitions industry must adjust, but though its growth will no longer
be explosive, it is hardly on the decline. "We really don't know what
the new normal will be, but will be higher than it was in 2008," says
Bill Brassard, an NSSF spokesman, in an interview. (I hope that
gunners have learned the lesson not to get caught short on ammunition
and reloading components.)
Speaking Of…: Jason Klinner went to the Quincy [IL] Plan Commission
Tuesday night with a request to sell firearms or firearm accessories
from his home. Commission members voted to reverse a staff
recommendation to deny the request, but added a stipulation that
Klinner could not have any ammunition on the property. "That's not
acceptable. I have my own firearms on the property," said Klinner, who
had already said that no ammunition would be sold from his home.
Commission member David Barnard told Klinner that "guns are a bad
thing to a lot of people" and the no-ammunition provision was one
possible way to get his special permit. It passed on a voice vote with
two dissenters. Only eight commissioners were present… Klinner said
the Department of Planning and Development had told him that only one
special permit has been issued for private firearms dealers working
out of their homes. Klinner then presented a list of nine Quincy
residents who have similar in-home operations as reported on the
Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms Web site…
http://www.whig.com/story/news/plan-commission-041410
http://www.examiner.com/x-43006-Quincy-Libertarian-Examiner~y2010m4d14-Antigun-Quincy-officials-tell-man-he-can-sell-firearms-if-he-removes-all-ammo-from-his-property
---
Second Amendment March: If one believed all of the vitriol that has
been, and is being generated against the upcoming Second Amendment
March in Washington, D.C. next Monday, April 19, one might expect a
parade of gun-toting Klansmen marching down Pennsylvania Avenue. It
appears to be an unfortunate aspect of life in America that one cannot
simply engage in a rational conversation on a hot political topic.
Civility has been replaced by the politics of destruction, and nowhere
is this more evident than in the mounting criticism of the upcoming
rally… From campaigning to keep legally-armed citizens out of
Starbucks coffee shops, to portraying gun rights activists as a
potentially dangerous mob, there appears to be a concerted, though not
necessarily coordinated, effort to marginalize firearms owners as a
bunch of extremist loons. Seeing that level of obsessive demonization
from the Left leaves one to demand an explanation…
Ohioans For Concealed Carry Executive Director Dan White and
Vice-President Bryan Torok report that the Ohio Second Amendment March
was a huge success. A substantial number of people between 250 and 500
gathered on Capitol Square at the Ohio Statehouse, many of them openly
carrying handguns and long guns. The speakers were well received by
the crowd and the significant law enforcement presence was clearly
evident from the Columbus PD, the Ohio Highway Patrol, and the
Columbus PD Mounted Unit on horseback. We could have told them there
was no need for crowd control – this was a group of law abiding gun
owners, not code pink or some other antagonistic gathering. We came to
hear the Ohio Attorney General, Nikki Goeser, Skip Coryell from SAM,
and other invited guests speak while showing our elected officials we
are here and we vote…
http://www.ammoland.com/2010/04/14/350-with-guns-make-ohio-second-amendment-march-a-huge-success/
---
Gun Locks Versus Training: In a four-part series last week, we
explored physicians advising patients who own guns to lock them up and
keep them separate from ammunition. My main objection, aside from most
doctors being unqualified to dispense gun safety advice, is that it
renders guns useless should you need them. Does that mean I'm against
locking up all guns? Of course not. I've never recommended "one size
fits all" for gun storage. I'm merely observing that if you find
yourself in a situation where you need a gun immediately, chances are
the reason for that need isn't going to wait for you to go and get it.
And then load it… What I am against is people thinking that's enough,
that a mere device is an acceptable substitute for training and
knowledge of their particular circumstances, needs and level of
preparedness. There's the quote attributed to Gene Brown that
"Foolproof systems don't take into account the ingenuity of fools,"
and we find unintended consequences in life bearing that out…
Rule Five Reminder: … Last week, Minnesota came within a horrifying
hair's breadth of yet another fatal school shooting. On April 5, a
14-year-old boy with a history of emotional problems and violent
tendencies walked through Hastings Middle School brandishing a
.22-caliber handgun. Like McLaughlin and Weise, he'd had little
trouble getting his hands on a firearm. According to authorities, the
weapon belonged to his foster family. Only "by the grace of God, no
one was hurt," said Tim Connell, the school police officer who tackled
the youth. After this near-miss, the Minnesota Legislature is
considering a bill, championed by Rep. Sandra Peterson, DFL-New Hope,
that would strengthen penalties for bringing a gun to school. While
the bill is well-intentioned, the reality is that increasing the fine
and prison sentence won't likely deter a troubled kid. The real
solution is rooted in common sense: keeping guns out of kids' hands in
the first place. (Rule Five: Maintain control of your firearm. This is
a challenging issue for parents and guardians. It is equally tragic if
the law denies youngsters access to a firearm they may need for
self-defense inside the home [a specific exemption from the federal
prohibition of handguns by juveniles, under 18 USC § 922(x)(3)(D)].
Adolescents are vulnerable to emotional shifts that may not be readily
apparent.)
http://www.startribune.com/opinion/editorials/90792869.html?elr=KArks7PYDiaK7DUqEiaDUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUU
---
Website Debates Lawful CCW: ProCon.org, a nonpartisan 501(c)3
nonprofit public charity dedicated to promoting critical thinking,
created the new website http://concealedguns.procon.org to explore
the core question "Should adults have the right to carry a concealed
handgun?" Carrying a concealed handgun in public is permitted by
non-law enforcement officials in 48 states as of Mar. 12, 2010. Two
states (Wisconsin and Illinois), and Washington, DC do not allow
concealed carry except by active and retired law enforcement officers,
although Wisconsin permits openly carrying firearms in public. In
1986, 35 states had provisions for concealed carry and eight of these
states had "shall-issue" laws. On May 12, 1987, Florida, a "may-issue"
state, passed a "shall-issue" law that stripped law enforcement of
discretion in issuing permits. Following a campaign by the National
Rifle Association (NRA), 28 states followed Florida's lead and adopted
"shall-issue" laws between 1987 and 2009. As of Mar. 18, 2010, 35
states have passed "shall-issue" laws… (While the 1987 reform of
Florida's permit system is generally credited with initiating the bulk
of the nationwide shift to shall-issue permits, prior to that five
other states were already shall-issue by statute, one [Alabama] by
practice and one [Vermont] has never required a permit.)
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/should-adults-have-the-right-to-carry-a-concealed-handgun-new-website-researches-pros-and-cons-in-concealed-carry-debate-90860679.html
http://concealedguns.procon.org/
---
Disposition of Firearms after Felony Conviction: Felons can't lawfully
possess guns - does it mean they can't even arrange for their sale,
and that the court may just order them destroyed? That seems to have
been the government's view in United States v. Brown (D.N.H. Apr. 9,
2010), and at least one court has apparently taken this view, but the
court in this case disagreed (some paragraph breaks added): "…Senior
Judge Longstaff's pragmatic solution to this problem is the
appropriate one: the court, exercising equitable powers, may order the
transfer of title to firearms lawfully owned by a person later
convicted of a felony (which are not subject to forfeiture or
confiscation as contraband) for the felon-owner's benefit. See United
States v. Approximately 627 Firearms, 589 F.Supp.2d 1129, 1140
(S.D.Iowa 2008) (quoting Cooper, 904 F.2d at 306 ("We see no reason
that a court ... could not order a sale for the account of a claimant
who ... legally could not possess firearms, were forfeiture to be
denied for any reason.")); United States v. Seifuddin, 820 F.2d 1074
(9th Cir.1987) (convicted felons retain a non-possessory interest in
seized firearms). That approach precludes convicted felons from
constructively possessing firearms (to the extent that term can be
teased to include transferring mere legal title); it precludes a
convicted felon from unilaterally dictating or directing disposition,
as some courts have found objectionable; it avoids serious
constitutional issues arising under the Takings Clause; and it fully
protects the felon-owner's legitimate property interests in a manner
consistent with applicable criminal law."
http://volokh.com/2010/04/14/the-second-amendment-and-the-takings-clause/
---
Pennsylvania County May Amend Ordinance: Westmoreland County
commissioners are considering an ordinance that would legalize guns in
county parks. Officials said Wednesday the proposal would update a
1974 code that generally outlawed firearms at the parks but allowed
guns in specific areas for hunting. Solicitor R. Mark Gesalman said
that ordinance, amended in 1995, conflicts with a state law that
permits guns in public places. "In Pennsylvania, you cannot restrict
somebody's right to carry a firearm, except in restricted areas like
courthouses," Gesalman said. The proposal strips existing language
from the code that specifically bans guns from the parks. The revised
ordinance would allow guns in all areas of county parks, but permits
the discharge of firearms only in designated hunting areas…
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/westmoreland/s_676547.html
---
Open-Carry Backlash in California: Could tactics used by the "open
carry" movement backfire? Assemblywoman Lori Saldaña, D-San Diego, and
allies of legislation she introduced Wednesday to ban the public
display of unloaded weapons believe so. State law permitting
Californians to display their empty-chamber firearms has been on the
books since about 1968, drawing little attention… "It wasn't a problem
we had to deal with. As it's become more prevalent over the last two
years, we've had to deal with it," said Emeryville Police Chief Ken
James, whose statewide law enforcement organization supports the
measure. "If we hadn't had a lot of these open-carry events, police
chiefs probably wouldn't be involved in it," he added. Saldaña cited
an open-carry event in Pacific Beach last year as alerting her to the
need for a ban on displaying guns, even unloaded, in public. There,
with thousands of people at the beach on a Saturday, about 60 members
of the movement walked along the boardwalk… (Note that the open carry
of loaded firearms [in public places] in California was banned in
response to a demonstration at the capitol by armed Black Panthers, a
bill signed by then-governor Ronald Reagan.)
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/apr/15/state-bill-would-end-open-carry-gun-rights/
---
Arizona Gunners Defend Constitutional Carry: When a Tucson firearms
instructor called a new gun bill "stupid" on TV, it set off
predictable objections from some gun-rights advocates. When the owner
of the store where the instructor works also criticized Arizona's new
concealed-carry bill - which only needs the governor's signature to
become law - that raised the heat in the debate… Now the gun owner who
first objected, Tucsonan David Bliss, is organizing a protest at the
gun store and shooting range, Marksman Pistol Institute, 5051 E. 29th
St… The exchange got hotter when Bliss responded: "It boils down to
this. You either respect the constitution or you don't. You either
promote individual liberty or you promote slavery. There is no grey
area. Freedom is an absolute." In her response, O'Connell accused
Bliss of misquoting her and said "It is my responsibility to protect
my patrons. This [the new law] means now I have to watch even closer
the nutcakes who wave guns in the air and act like total
testosterone-filled jackasses." That's when Bliss decided to launch
his protest, this Saturday morning. As of today, the protest had 19
confirmed attendees. (The term "constitutional carry" actually refers
to the state constitution, which states, "The right of the individual
citizen to bear arms in defense of himself or the state shall not be
impaired..." What we've got here is basically a business and its
employee seeking to use a state law to continue to provide a market
for their instructional service. Arizonans who opt to carry firearms
in exposed holsters, without permits, have not shown a tendency to
"wave guns in the air and act like total testosterone-filled
jackasses."
http://azstarnet.com/news/blogs/senor-reporter/article_8d57d648-47fb-11df-b7db-001cc4c03286.html
---
In the Aftermath of a Shooting: Carl Mintz, the 27-year-old Farmington
Hills man accused of shooting a fellow driver who approached his car
during an altercation, on Tuesday pleaded not guilty to charges of
assault with intent to do great bodily harm less than murder and
felony firearm. Farmington Hills police say both men were traveling
north on Orchard Lake Road on Monday afternoon when Mintz irked the
20-year-old driver behind him by tapping his brakes repeatedly. The
victim approached Mintz's car, the two exchanged words and Mintz shot
him in the arm… Fox 2 spoke with his brother Monday, who said Mintz
has "been very angry lately," citing the fact that both their parents
have died in the past decade. The television station now reports Mintz
is a regular YouTube commentator who has uploaded a number of
hate-filled videos, typically targeting Islam… (Without attempting to
divine the merits of the case, note how YouTube postings enter, as a
minimum, into the press coverage, as can forum postings, etc.)
http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ssf/2010/04/farmington_hills_road_rage_sus.html
---
When Guns Are Outlawed: A former police firearms instructor arrested
after he "inadvertently" kept two bullets has been fined £450. At an
earlier hearing Sergeant Steven Campbell, 40, from Hamilton, admitted
having the ammunition without the necessary paperwork. The serving
officer was given an additional fine of £300 for assaulting a women at
a farm in Lanarkshire… "She made, amongst others, an allegation that
the accused kept ammunition at the house, albeit two bullets." Mr Ogg
said two cartridges were later seized which Campbell would have
"perfectly lawfully" had access to at work. He was a firearms
instructor at the force training centre at Jackton, South Lanarkshire…
Campbell's QC Paul McBride previously told the court that the police
officer had "inadvertently" took the bullets home with him. Mr McBride
said: "He was absent minded having attended some police training
events. "He had taken them, had planned to return them to the police,
but forgot to do so." The lawyer said Campbell acted Campbell acted
out of "sheer frustration" when he assaulted the woman…
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/glasgow_and_west/8617307.stm
---
Tangentially Related: The White House very quickly got out in front of
a story. There is no truth to the rumors that President Obama might
name Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to the Supreme Court. The
president has the highest respect for his onetime rival for the
Democratic presidential nomination, we are assured. But why did the
administration go out of its way to shoot down this particular trial
balloon? They didn't jump up to say no, they would not be naming
outgoing Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm (D) or current Secretary of
Homeland Security Janet Napolitano (D). Or even HHS Secretary Kathleen
Sebelius. Why did they jump up so fast to jump down on the name of
Hillary? Well, the summer might already see a battle over this
nomination. With Stevens leaving after nearly thirty-five years on the
Court, his replacement is sure to raise a storm of controversy. Do
they really want more? …
