Archive for the 'Guns' Category



Judge Upholds California Gun Microstamping Law

BY Herschel Smith
8 hours, 48 minutes ago

CBS Sacramento:

A federal court has rejected a challenge to California’s gun safety law, possibly paving the way for a requirement that new guns mark the bullets they fire so they can be traced.

The ruling on Wednesday was a defeat for two gun rights groups that argued the Unsafe Handgun Act violated the constitutional right to bear arms.

The law prohibits the manufacture or sale in California of any gun that doesn’t meet certain safety requirements. It was aimed at outlawing cheap “Saturday Night Specials” that were disproportionally used in crimes.

A 2007 amendment added a requirement that new or modified semi-automatic handguns include technology that microstamps a bullet casing with a code identifying the gun’s make, model and serial number.

That requirement was held up by concerns about patent issues on the technology but took effect in 2013. However, the federal challenge continued.

This week’s ruling “means that more gun crimes will be solved, more lives will be saved and California communities will be safer,” said a Friday statement from Los Angeles City Attorney Mike Feuer, who authored the 2007 amendment when he was a state Assembly member.

The gun safety law initially was challenged in 2009 by the nonprofit Second Amendment Foundation and Calguns Foundation, Inc.

Their lawsuit argued that the state law unconstitutionally prevented some members from buying certain types of handguns that were not on the state’s roster of permitted weapons.

The judge in the federal case rejected the argument that the law was onerous, saying that the commercial sale of firearms in the state “proceeds robustly,” with about 1.5 million handgun transactions since the lawsuit was filed.

The ruling also noted that the state’s roster of permitted handguns includes 795 models.

More from Orange County Register:

The law doesn’t violate the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment because gun owners don’t have a right to specific types of firearms, U.S. District Judge Kimberly Mueller in Sacramento said in her ruling.

“Plaintiffs insist they have the right to determine the precise way in which they would exercise their Second Amendment rights,” Mueller said. The insistence upon particular handguns falls “outside the scope of the right to bear arms,” she said.

Several observations are in order at this point.  First of all, Ms. Kimberly Mueller was unanimously confirmed by the U.S. Senate in 2010.  So much for gun rights being important to the GOP.

Next, it bears noting that while Ms. Mueller ruled that “[t]he insistence upon particular handguns falls “outside the scope of the right to bear arms,” she should have ruled that the constitution contains the phrase “shall not be infringed,” and that infringing is exactly what this law does.

Third, as to the notion that “this week’s ruling “means that more gun crimes will be solved, more lives will be saved and California communities will be safer,” said a Friday statement from Los Angeles City Attorney Mike Feuer, who authored the 2007 amendment when he was a state Assembly member,” it means nothing of the sort and Mr. Feuer is a liar.

Peaceable citizens purchase handguns from FFLs who follow the law.  Such people do not commit crimes where cartridges can be used to trace back to the particular person and weapon used to commit the crime.  That’s all a smokescreen to hide the real intent of the law.

They will no doubt argue that in order for this to work, they must implement the necessary corollary to the microstamping law, which is universal gun registration.  No, not just universal background checks, which effects sales going forward, but universal gun registration where the authorities have a record of all guns and who owns them.  The German Nazis wanted to know this sort of information too.  Of course, none of this has any effect on guns owned by criminals who will not register them.  It only applies to peaceable citizens.

Finally, the entire issue with the number of guns on the approved list today is yet another ruse.  The guns will fall off the list very soon.  The problem is that the list includes guns that do not include microstamping technology, and this is okay as long as no modifications are made.  Modifications might include melonite coating, different grips, safety improvements, match grade barrels, or anything else.  Since manufacturers do make routine minor (or major) modifications involving retooling the assembly line and machinery, that means that any new gun must include microstamping technology.

Gun manufacturers know exactly what will happen to their customer base if they produce weapons that are microstamped.  It will disappear from the face of the earth, and California politicians likely know this and are using it to rid California of legally sold guns.  In other words, they know that the “robust” sale of guns in California is a lie as it pertains to future sales.

I have interacted with Smith & Wesson, and to my dismay they won’t go on record and indicate to me that will refuse to sell to law enforcement if they cannot sell to other citizens.  This is a shame and a travesty of justice.  They will sell guns to law enforcement, while other citizens will see their list of potential guns dry up.  But to be fair to Smith & Wesson, the same is true of Glock, H&K and other manufacturers.  I just have more respect for the quality of S&W products and believe that they could be a beacon of liberty in California if they chose to.  They have not chosen to.  They have chosen money over freedom.

The NSSF has also weighed in.

… as several independent, peer-reviewed studies have shown, this nascent technology is flawed. It is incapable of reliably, consistently and legibly imprinting the required identifying information in two locations on an expended cartridge casing. Even the patent holder in a 2012 study he co-authored acknowledged the problems with this technology and called for further study rather than mandating its use. A National Academy of Science review, forensic firearms examiners and a UC Davis study reached similar conclusions. Because of the technology’s inherent limitations, no manufacturer can comply with this new law.

What the Legislature actually did was ban the innovation and stop the continuous improvement of today’s manufacturing processes that would otherwise enhance firearms safety and other functionality.

Compounding the problem is the state attorney general’s overreaching definition of what constitutes a “new model,” thus triggering the microstamping requirement. According to the attorney general, the slightest modification or design enhancement done as part of the normal manufacturing process for any product, such as changing the way a part is made or its dimensions to make it stronger and more durable, is a “new model,” which would now require microstamping. As a result, pistol models deemed as “not unsafe” by California are rapidly falling off the approved-for-sale roster.

And that’s what I just told you.  But notice the way Lawrence Keane broaches the subject.  He says, “What the Legislature actually did was ban the innovation and stop the continuous improvement of today’s manufacturing processes that would otherwise enhance firearms safety and other functionality.”

He means that the technology could otherwise be good and wholesome and improve safety and functionality.  He doesn’t mention that its corollary is universal gun registration and that we will not cross that line.  Ever.  Ever.

The NSSF is not your friend.  Their argument is wrongheaded because they have crafted it according to their wrongheaded views.  These measures in California are totalitarian in nature and the time has come and gone for peaceable folk to negotiate and befriend the process.  The black robes of the Supreme Court will not overrule Ms. Mueller.  It sounds to me like one of two things is in order.  Either civil disobedience, or relocation because the war for California is lost.  I do not begrudge either choice, and I don’t know which is best.

But as for me and my house, we will treat guns designed with microstamping as I do so-called “smart guns.  I will never have one.

SWAT Commander Has Accidental Discharge At Town Hall

BY Herschel Smith
9 hours, 41 minutes ago

News from Tennessee:

An accidental police gunshot into lobby carpet at Town Hall startled officials attending a Town Council workshop Thursday night.

No one was injured after the weapon of Lt. Earl Barnes, the SWAT team commander, discharged after he tied his shoes in a chair in a lobby area. Doors were open next to the meeting room while his boss, Police Chief Kevin Arnold, was explaining upcoming training for his records office to elected officials.

“When it first happened, I thought it was one of these light bulbs (in the ceiling) that burst,” Arnold said during an interview Friday in the same meeting room.

After hearing the gunshot, the chief moved quickly from his seat in the meeting room that was closest to the door, reached for his holster and even thought it was possible an intruder had sneaked through the back door of Town Hall and shot Barnes.

“My main concern was not only him but ‘do we have a situation developing here,'” said the chief, who was relieved to see the lieutenant who usually provides security detail for Town Council meetings was unharmed. “Police officers are trained to go to the threat. It was very brief. He said, ‘I had an accidental discharge.'”

The kind of “accidental discharge” he had was preventable (well, I guess they all are).  Seriously though, they did have quite the “situation developing here.”  The chief pulled the trigger of his weapon in the wrong place at the wrong time.  But it gets even worse and weirder.

Lt. Barnes asked if he could go home after the incident, and the chief agreed.

“He was very embarrassed,” said Arnold, who estimated that Barnes has served with Smyrna Police for more than 25 years. “He’s an outstanding officer, but unfortunately, he made a mistake.”

The chief said Barnes will face discipline to be determined after Arnold discusses the gun discharge with Human Resources staff and Town Manager Harry Gill.

“It will usually be several days of suspension without pay,” Arnold said. “We are very lucky Lt. Barnes wasn’t injured. We’re very lucky that no citizens were injured, and no members of staff and no members of council were injured.”

Barnes made two mistakes, the chief said. One included Barnes failing to snap his holster to ensure the weapon would remain in place after he had used his pistol as part of a felony traffic stop to arrest a man accused of armed robbery of a gas station/convenience store at 33 N. Lowry.

“What we think happened is he didn’t snap it down enough in place,” Arnold said.

The other mistake came after Barnes sat down to tie his shoes and then reached for his gun when the pistol fell out of his holster.

Yea, I’ll bet he wanted to go home.  Listen to me very carefully so that you don’t act like the man in the article.  If your gun is falling and you have a round chambered, do not ever try to catch it.  Ever.  Ever.  I’ll leave it to the readers to explain why in the context of grip safeties, trigger brush guards, etc.

“We train our officers several times a year in using these weapons,” said Arnold, adding that his officers are expected to be armed and ready to shoot. “Unfortunately, we’re in the line of work where we have to carry weapons.”

Arnold said Barnes did what would be human nature to reach for something that was falling and forgetting the training to let the gun drop to the ground.

“Unfortunately, he made the mistake, and we are held accountable for our actions,” the chief said. “I have accidentally dropped mine at home. I cringed. It didn’t go off.”

A 25-year officer with Smyrna who has been chief for eight years, Arnold said his department has had four or five incidents involving officer guns firing by mistake. Only one of those in 1998 involved an injury to Officer Muhammad Ali (formerly known as Robert Ladell Haynes).

“He almost died,” Arnold said.

My God.  It looks like this department needs to be rid of their weapons before someone gets hurt even worse.  At least the (nearly lethal) negligent discharge didn’t happen to an artist formerly known as Prince.  Then I might think they were making this whole thing up.  It almost looks like that anyway.

West Virginia Constitutional Carry

BY Herschel Smith
9 hours, 57 minutes ago

WOWKTV.com:

The WV Senate on Feb. 27 passed a bill that would allow for anyone over the age of 18 to carry a concealed weapon in West Virginia without a permit.

Sen. Mike Romano, D-Harrison, offered three amendments before the bill passed the Senate with only two votes against it.

Sen. Ron Miller, D-Greenbrier, and Sen. Corey Palumbo, D-Kanawha, were the only dissenting votes.

One of Romano’s amendments would have added a training course for anyone carrying a concealed weapon. Other amendments would have capped the age of concealed carry at 21 years old. Each amendment was rejected.

Romano ultimately voted for the bill.

“I was an 18-year-old kid, and I don’t think at that age they’re mature enough to understand the grave responsibility they have,” Romano said of changing the age of carrying a concealed weapon. “The Senate, unfortunately, caved in to special interests. I voted for the bill because I think it’s right, but I thought the amendments would add common sense adjustments.”

The legislation goes to the WV House of Delegates for consideration.

Well good for them.  In spite of the gun control efforts to the Southeast by communist Terry McAuliffe, it’s good to know and show that better can be done.  It’s important to note that this is the Senate.  I don’t know much about the Governor or how likely he is to sign this legislation if it passes the House.  He is a democrat.

If I have any readers from West Virginia, please comment here and/or send me a note and keep us posted on progress of this legislation.

Notes From HPS

BY Herschel Smith
10 hours, 21 minutes ago

Via David Codrea, and also via reader Pat Hines, here is the Georgia Carry response to the proposed M855 ban.  It’s a good response, and readers will be familiar with the common concepts with which we deal every day, such as the difference between FMJ and MC ammunition (metal case where the tail end is not jacketed).  Also see the section on the fact that the “sporting purposes test” is unconstitutional.  Of course it is.

David Codrea:

That’s what’s going on with eight health organizations, notably the American College of Physicians, joining with the American Bar Association to demand more “gun control” in a “Call to Action” published earlier this week.

I’m glad David is covering this.  I saw the media frenzy this week and was uninterested.  I don’t think it’s any of my business trying to figure out ways to make the public safer from guns by curtailing the right to be armed.  I don’t think it’s any of their business either, but reading David’s piece reminds you that not only is it not their business, it isn’t in their area of expertise.  It would be like asking me what drugs to prescribe for congestive heart failure.  Doctors are going to have enough things to do under Obamacare (like useless paperwork).  They had better get their head in gear to deal with the coming calamity.

David Codrea:

In his speech Friday before the Conservative Political Action Conference in National Harbor, Md., National Rifle Association Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre discussed a host of issues impacting gun rights, declaring they all depend on each other. Curiously absent from his speech was any acknowledgment of the danger amnesty for illegal aliens with a “pathway to citizenship” would pose to continued government recognition of the right to keep and bear arms.

And yet, immigration – both legal and illegal – is the most significant threat we face as a nation and a people.  It is a clear and present danger.  David and I have both pointed that out.  Time is running out.

Per Mike Vanderboegh, here is an interview of Anthony Bosworth on his arrest.

Police chief arrested for brandishing gun while intoxicated.  Gee, I wouldn’t do something like that.  I guess it’s a good thing I don’t have all of that training and expertise that he does, you know, since he is a LEO and everything and I am not.

Guns Tags:

Notes From HPS

BY Herschel Smith
4 days, 7 hours ago

David Codrea:

Washington State liberty activist Anthony Bosworth was arrested Wednesday outside a federal building for openly carrying a firearm, an announcement on Bosworth’s Facebook page reports. Within hours, he had been released with no criminal charges, his wife informed supporters.

Liberty advocate Kit Lange has fleshed out further details of the arrest on the website for The Patrick Henry Society. The “co-organizer of Arms Expo 2015 was arrested this morning outside the federal courthouse in Spokane as he attended a states’ rights rally with his family,” Lange reports.

Bosworth was arrested in front of his wife and children by agents for the Department of Homeland Security, who “claimed that Bosworth was in violation of federal law by open carrying a firearm on federal property.”

Read the rest of the report at Examiner.  I won’t be the first one, but I’ll certainly join the chorus and call bull shit on this one.  There is no such law that prohibits firearms on “federal property,” as if all property is subject to a single law.  For example, firearms are certainly allowed in national parks and have been since 2010.  A military base is technically considered a federal reservation, and firearms are allowed there (even personal ones with approval).  The arresting officer just made that one up.

Read Mike Vanderboegh’s take on this.  ” I was particularly interested that the FBI was particularly interested in talking to Anthony about me. Nice to know I’m living in their heads rent-free as well. (Maybe they can get with Gottlieb and split the cost.) The FBI, it seems, is particularly interested in the national armed civil disobedience movement. It really must flummox them. We don’t fit any pattern they’ve seen recently …”

David Codrea:

Setting the state up for massive gun owner civil disobedience along the lines of what has occurred in California and is currently happening in New York and Connecticut, Democrat State Senator Jacqueline Y. Collins filed the Firearms Registration Act with the Secretary of State on Friday. The act was then presented for first reading and referred to the Democrat-dominated Assignments Committee.

Collins’ measure “[p]rovides that every person in the State must register each firearm he or she owns or possesses in accordance with the Act,” the official synopsis declares.

It’s easy for people to file legislation that someone else has to enforce.  So send in the enforcers, Ms. Collins.  See what happens then.  Perhaps you can go on one of the raids yourself, no?

Kurt Hofmann:

But Dr. Alan Delamater says even exposing young teens to this environment is dangerous.

“It’s another family gaming activity, right? Wrong. I don’t think it’s just another activity. I think this is something that can seriously affect child development and not in a good way,” Dr. Delamater said.

Delamater does not clarify whether or not “exposing” these young men and women–some of whom will in a few short years be serving in the military–to all firearms represents a problem for “child development” (whatever that unspecified “problem” is), or if the danger is restricted to fully-automatic firearms.

What does the man want, for boys to play with dolls and learn how to self actualize each other?  Every man needs to know things like engine building, guns, and farm animals.  If you don’t, buy a gun and learn to use it, tear an engine down, and volunteer your time at a ranch training horses.  And stay away from Dr. Delamater while he wets his pants.

Kurt Hofmann:

They’re refusing shipment until they know more about how it will be regulated–a pretty strong indicator that they know it’s not regulated now.  As Wilson says, there is absolutely no reason for FedEx to be concerned about legal issues, because there are no legal issues with shipping CNC milling machines. Wilson also points out that FedEx ships actual guns and ammunition, both of which are heavily regulated under federal and many states’ laws, and that hasn’t stopped them.

Read the rest of Kurt’s analysis.  I think Kurt is right.  There has been some dirty dealing going on behind closed doors on this one.

Christian militia takes on ISIS.  I want to be careful and very Christian as I respond to this and provide an assessment  – as a Christian.  Okay, here it goes.  May the Christian militia make the streets run red with the blood of the savages and send them to meet their maker who will send them to hell.  Godspeed to the militia.

The ATF reaffirms the Sig pistol brace is legal after all.  Whatever.  This is all being done by a bunch of worthless lawyers who have never used the thing and wouldn’t know it from a 2X4 if it bit them in the ass.  Ignore them and do what you want to with the brace.  The ATF has turned so paranoid and controlling they have become an undignified, unprofessional, boorish bore, like that uncle who cleans septic tanks for a living, the one with bad breath and creepy looks whom everyone avoids.

More From Eugene Volokh On Open Carry

BY Herschel Smith
5 days, 7 hours ago

Recall that I had some questions for Eugene Volokh here?  Eugene responded thusly via email:

Eugene: To answer your questions, of course if a state decided to order police officers to carry concealed, police officers would have to carry concealed – just as it can tell them what kinds of guns to carry, what kinds of uniforms to wear (or not wear, if they’re undercover), or whatever else.  When the state hires someone to provide armed protection for the public, it can tell prescribe in great detail just how this duty is to be carried out (and how it is not to be carried out).

HPS: Thanks for the response, but I confess that I find it most unsatisfying because you have grounded your answer in contractual obligations rather than whether something rises to the level of being an infringement of basic rights.

Eugene: Well, you asked a question:  “Suppose rather than the rights of an ‘ordinary’ citizen being addressed here it was the rights of law enforcement officers who may need to defend their lives….  Would any court in the land have dared to force LEOs to carry concealed?”  The answers is every court in the land would uphold such a requirement.  (Indeed, I’m pretty sure that many nonuniformed police officers are expected to carry concealed, and are sometimes required to carry concealed.)  Now you say you’re unsatisfied because my answer is based on contractual obligations.  (To be precise, it’s based in the government’s power to fire employees, with or without a contract, who don’t follow its rules on such matters.)  But your own question was premised on “contractual” matters:  The only reason that law enforcement officers are law enforcement officers is that the government has hired them to do the job.  You can’t ask a question about what law enforcement officers – who are called that only because they are a particular kind of employee – can be forced to do (on pain of losing their jobs), and then sensibly object to the answer that law enforcement officers have to follow the rules set forth by their employers.

Perhaps because of an unintentional misdirect on my part, I think Eugene is missing the broader point I tried to make.  If it isn’t an infringement on rights to force individuals to carry concealed rather than openly, is he in fact not acknowledging the very real delay in presenting the weapon for use with an effective sight picture (carrying concealed means that the weapon can get hung on shirts, pants, and other clothing, and certainly means a delay in presenting the weapon due to the need to remove the offending clothing in order to get to the weapon).

And if this is all true, wouldn’t LEOs point it out if we required them to carry concealed?  And if this isn’t an infringement of rights, then at what point does it become so?  Can the law require us to have one hand tied behind our back?  If seems a silly question, and how about one to which the courts would no doubt be more amenable?  Would it infringe on our rights if the law required us to have our weapons unloaded, regardless of method of carry?  Or would it infringe on our rights if the law required us to have two or more garments covering a weapon in order to ensure that we had no inadvertent flashing of the weapon if we bend over or in a stiff wind?

Eugene has more on open carry.

… it seems to me that, under the First Amendment, the state can’t ban someone from wearing a T-shirt or a large pin saying “I’m legally carrying a concealed handgun” at the same time that he is legally carrying a concealed handgun. The T-shirt or pin wouldn’t be a punishable threat of illegal conduct, because it is specifically referring to legal conduct, and it offers no reason to think that the wearer is going to use the gun illegally. And while wearing such an item might draw police attention, so would legal open carry.

Let’s take this sort of “announced carry” — concealed carry coupled with a statement that one is carrying — a step further. Say that some gun rights enthusiasts start wearing transparent plastic gun-shaped things strapped to their hips, in transparent holsters — something that is obviously not a real gun, but is symbolic of a real gun. (It should certainly not look like these T-shirts with realistic-looking holsters and guns printed on them.)

When asked, the wearers explain that these are symbolic of the fact that they are indeed lawfully carrying a concealed gun. The news gets out, and wearing such a transparent item on one’s hip will become understood as equivalent to a T-shirt saying “I’m legally carrying a concealed handgun.” (Compare how wearing particular ribbons or other symbols becomes understood at times as a particular kind of statement.) I likewise think this can’t be banned; the only reason to ban the holster would be the message that it sends, which would likewise violate the First Amendment.

On balance, the effect wouldn’t be terribly different from open carry …

Well, I think it would, and Eugene doesn’t account for the fact that some of us who open carry are not doing so in order to make a point (although I don’t disparage point-making as a legitimate end).  I consider concealed carry to be intrusive, uncomfortable and inefficient regarding “presentation” of the weapon.

What do readers think?

Guns Tags:

Notes From HPS

BY Herschel Smith
5 days, 8 hours ago

David Codrea:

It’s also in spite of almost daily revelations corroborating the increasing danger, and not just from the “illegal” side of the equation. Just within the past day, we’ve learned that Muslim immigration is outpacing that from Mexico and Central America, that 40 percent of New Yorkers are now foreign-born and half the residents of New York City speak a language other than English at home. We’ve also seen that the Border Patrol has been ordered to curtail deportations. Both legal and illegal immigration are being exploited by cheap labor Republicans and “earned citizenship” Democrats, both counting on the directed “cultural terraforming” to advance globalist interests and “fundamentally transform” the country.

David and I have been insistent, and for a very long time now, that the most insidious and dangerous threat to America has been and continues to be immigration, both legal and illegal.  The only question that remains is this: have we reached the point of no return?  If so, then we participate in politics in order to give us all more time to prepare for the inevitable dystopia.

David Codrea:

Johnson’s advice, that “public vigilance, public awareness and public caution in situations like this is particularly important” is true enough, but what’s lacking from that counsel is public preparedness to do anything about it if an attack happens, in spite of reassurances and promises of “enhanced security.” That’s because … well … let Mall of America speak for itself.

“At Mall of America, safety is a top priority,” it advises visitors on a Guests & Security page. “Guns are banned on these premises.”

So then you stay off those premises.  Simple.  Let Johnson answer for everything that happens after that.

Jesus invoked in the russian rebel’s war on the Ukraine?  Um, since we don’t know what Jesus looked like, the only real picture I see is of Che Guevara.  And I know Jesus and an egomaniacal communist named Putin have nothing to do with each other.

Gun prank in Deleware court:

A prank involving two prosecutors, a courthouse bailiff and a pointed gun has led a judge to revoke the ability of bailiffs statewide to carry firearms when working in courtrooms.

The incident occurred the week of Feb. 2 on the second floor of the Sussex County Courthouse, where the county’s Superior Court is housed. A person who works in the courthouse said the prank involved the courthouse’s chief bailiff, Delbert Garrison, opening the door to a side room where lawyers work and pointing his service weapon at a deputy attorney general in the room.

[ … ]

In the wake of the prank, Superior Court President Judge Jan Jurden made a decision to disallow bailiffs from carrying firearms, two sources told The News Journal. The decision was conveyed to attorneys and courthouse staff Wednesday.

David says not much else is needed in the way of commentary.  I don’t know, I wanted to offer up one observation.  Notice in response to this irresponsible act (which no reader of mine would ever perpetrate), the judge engaged in the same thing they always do, i.e., pre-emptive policing and judging, rather than simply holding the perpetrators accountable for their actions.

Guns Tags:

Eugene Volokh On Open Carry

BY Herschel Smith
1 week, 4 days ago

The Washington Post:

So the Florida Court of Appeal held Wednesday in Norman v. State. It concluded that the Second Amendment applies to carrying for self-defense outside the home.

“A blanket prohibition on carrying [a] gun in public prevents a person from defending himself anywhere except inside his home,” and as such constitutes a “substantial … curtailment of the right of armed self-defense.”

… the Legislature’s discretion in this area is not limitless. For example, the [Second Circuit] in Kachalsky upheld New York’s prohibitive licensing scheme using an intermediate scrutiny analysis that gave too much deference to the legislature, without considering the fact that the licensing scheme in question rendered the right to bear arms outside the home virtually non-existent…. A right is essentially “destroyed [if the] exercise of [that] right is limited to a few people, in a few places, at a few times.”

The Legislature “has a right to prescribe a particular manner of carry, provided that it does not ‘cut[] off the exercise of the right of the citizen altogether to bear arms, or, under the color of prescribing the mode, render[] the right itself useless.’” The Legislature is permitted to regulate the manner in which arms are borne for the purpose of maintaining public peace and safety, so long as any such regulation leaves available a viable carry mode.

I think the court was quite right to recognize a right to carry guns in public for self-defense (for more on this, see here). I also think the court was right to allow the state to limit such carrying to concealed carrying, precisely because such carrying doesn’t substantially interfere with the ability to defend oneself. (That’s especially so because, if a situation arises in which a person reasonably perceives an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury, the person would be free then to display the gun in self-defense, as well as use it, if necessary.)

So let’s play a thought experiment.  Suppose rather than the rights of an “ordinary” citizen being addressed here it was the rights of law enforcement officers who may need to defend their lives.  Would Eugene have made the same argument?  Would law enforcement have stood for being told they must carry concealed?  Would any court in the land have dared to force LEOs to carry concealed?  Do you think law enforcement would make the argument that drawing from a concealed carry position (IWB covered by clothing or perhaps ankle carry rig) might endanger their lives more than if they have the weapon ready from open carry due to response time?

Remember under Tennessee versus Garner LEOs can use their weapons for the very same reason we can use ours, i.e., for self defense or the defense of the life of someone else (or to prevent assault or bodily injury), and for no other reason(s).  So then how are we any different than LEOs, and why should such requirements be placed on us if they are not placed on LEOs?  How is it the right decision by the court to uphold a law that treats us differently?

Surely Eugene knows as much about Tennessee versus Garner (and its follow-on cases) as we do.  Does Eugene have an answer for why it’s okay for the court to treat us differently?  Has Eugene thought through this clearly enough yet?

Notes From HPS

BY Herschel Smith
1 week, 4 days ago

Kurt Hofmann:

More fundamental, of course, is the fact that the very reason that for the citizenry to be free, we must have a right to keep and bear arms (not, readers will note, a “right to keep and bear sporting goods”) that shall not be infringed, is that we must have access to weapons with which we can pose a credible threat to the government’s enforcers, if that government makes such action necessary. The M855 rounds are a part of that credible threat–and that is undoubtedly why this administration is trying to neutralize it.

It’s always good to hear truth-telling.  Kurt’s comment that we must have access to weapons with which we can pose a credible threat to the government’s enforcers, if that government makes such action necessary” exactly captures the intent of the second amendment and the experience of the founders.

David Codrea:

Per Denise Brown of ATF Enforcement Programs and Services in this afternoon’s telephone conversation, this will “not actually be a [regulatory] change, more of a policy along those lines.” Brown said the framework document is a notice only, and will therefore not be published in the Federal Register, characterizing the document’s intent as “information gathering” in order to collect technical information, which could affect the Bureau’s final determination.

How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?  It sounds as if the ATF thinks they have found a legal (or pseudo-legal) way around following the rules.  This is what your tax dollars do when they hire lawyers for the DoJ.  Yea, those dollars.  Those hard earned dollars you make with blood, sweat and tears, those dollars that cause gray hair after so many years of fighting the system, or the ground, or those machines.  Those dollars taken from you by the power of a badge and gun.

Mike Vanderboegh:

The trick is how do we maintain our rights when all the branches of government in a given state — the legislative, judicial and executive backed up by their willing handmaidens in the press (try looking in a mirror) — are in the hands of people whom the Founders would deem “domestic enemies of the Constitution.”  The residents of the aforementioned states have answered that question by refusing to comply and daring the “authorities” to do anything about it.

Refusing to comply and daring the authorities to do anything about it.  It really does point to a problem of courage on the part of the authorities, doesn’t it?

ABC7Chicago:

A law enforcement officer was injured when his gun accidentally discharged at the Cook County Courthouse in Bridgeview. No one else was hurt.

The officer was transported by ambulance with a gunshot wound to his leg from the courthouse at 10220 S. 76th Avenue shortly before 10 a.m., according to the Cook County Sheriff’s Department. The officer is expected to be OK. No one else was injured.

Earlier Wednesday morning, an alarm at the courthouse malfunctioned, forcing an evacuation of the building. The officer was retrieving a gun from a locker it went off.

I just can’t tell you how many times that has happened to me.

Guns Tags:

Houston Police Union Mocks Open Carry

BY Herschel Smith
1 week, 5 days ago

Just not open carry for cops.  Raw Story:

A Texas police chief belittled an open carry activist who claimed there was an easy way to determine who was a “bad guy” with a gun.

Chris Hall spoke out last month during a rally at the statehouse organized by Come and Take It – Texas, saying there’s little reason to fear someone openly carrying a gun around in public.

“The easiest way to find out if it’s a bad guy is which direction it’s pointed,” said Hall, who was carrying a rifle over his shoulder at the time. “If it’s pointed at you, they’re a bad guy. If it’s not pointed at you, don’t worry about it.”

But Ray Hunt, president of the Houston Police Officer’s Union, dismissed the pro-gun activist’s comments as ridiculous.

“That person’s never been a police officer and never been shot at,” Hunt said. “That’s what I would have to say to that person.”

[ … ]
Hunt admitted that concealed carry did not create some of the problems that police feared, and he said officers would adjust if open carry is passed.

“It clearly is going to make our job different and more difficult, but not something that we can’t live with,” he said.

Houston’s police chief said open carry would make police work even more dangerous.

“As a police chief trying to keep two and a half million people safe, I’m just opposed to inserting more guns into a situation that I feel like could cause more harm,” said Houston Police Chief Charles McClelland.

Hunt is lying and he knows it.  Nothing about open carry will make his job more difficult.  It many ways it might be easier.

As for the Houston Police Chief, he has his own problems that should occupy his attention rather than allowing progressive political causes like gun control to consume him.

“A Houston Police Department officer has been relieved of duty after being charged with allegedly stealing $60 worth of ammunition from an outdoors store.  Stephen Sargent, 26, has been on the force for two months and is still considered a probationary officer. HPD will decide what disciplinary action to take after an internal affairs investiagtion can be completed, officials said.”

“Former Houston Police officer Robert Manzanales is charged with tampering with a governmental record – a felony. He was allegedly part of a scheme in which traffic officers listed each other as witnesses when issuing citations so they could later claim overtime while waiting at municipal court in the event they were needed to testify. He is also accused of perjury for allegedly lying on the witness stand.”

“Dothan police arrested a longtime Houston County Sheriff’s deputy over the weekend, charging him with third-degree domestic violence for a dispute with his stepchild.”

So tell me again, just who are these criminals who open carry, and who will make life more difficult for the police?


26th MEU (10)
Abu Muqawama (12)
ACOG (2)
ACOGs (1)
Afghan National Army (36)
Afghan National Police (17)
Afghanistan (675)
Afghanistan SOFA (4)
Agriculture in COIN (3)
AGW (1)
Air Force (28)
Air Power (9)
al Qaeda (83)
Ali al-Sistani (1)
America (6)
Ammunition (17)
Animals in War (4)
Ansar al Sunna (15)
Anthropology (3)
AR-15s (45)
Arghandab River Valley (1)
Arlington Cemetery (2)
Army (35)
Assassinations (2)
Assault Weapon Ban (26)
Australian Army (5)
Azerbaijan (4)
Backpacking (2)
Badr Organization (8)
Baitullah Mehsud (21)
Basra (17)
BATFE (48)
Battle of Bari Alai (2)
Battle of Wanat (17)
Battle Space Weight (3)
Bin Laden (7)
Blogroll (2)
Blogs (4)
Body Armor (17)
Books (2)
Border War (7)
Brady Campaign (1)
Britain (26)
British Army (35)
Camping (4)
Canada (1)
Castle Doctrine (1)
Caucasus (6)
CENTCOM (7)
Center For a New American Security (8)
Charity (3)
China (10)
Christmas (7)
CIA (12)
Civilian National Security Force (3)
Col. Gian Gentile (9)
Combat Outposts (3)
Combat Video (2)
Concerned Citizens (6)
Constabulary Actions (3)
Coolness Factor (2)
COP Keating (4)
Corruption in COIN (4)
Council on Foreign Relations (1)
Counterinsurgency (214)
DADT (2)
David Rohde (1)
Defense Contractors (2)
Department of Defense (114)
Department of Homeland Security (9)
Disaster Preparedness (2)
Distributed Operations (5)
Dogs (5)
Drone Campaign (3)
EFV (3)
Egypt (12)
Embassy Security (1)
Enemy Spotters (1)
Expeditionary Warfare (17)
F-22 (2)
F-35 (1)
Fallujah (17)
Far East (3)
Fathers and Sons (1)
Favorite (1)
Fazlullah (3)
FBI (1)
Featured (166)
Federal Firearms Laws (15)
Financing the Taliban (2)
Firearms (300)
Football (1)
Force Projection (35)
Force Protection (4)
Force Transformation (1)
Foreign Policy (27)
Fukushima Reactor Accident (6)
Ganjgal (1)
Garmsir (1)
general (14)
General Amos (1)
General James Mattis (1)
General McChrystal (39)
General McKiernan (6)
General Rodriguez (3)
General Suleimani (7)
Georgia (19)
GITMO (2)
Google (1)
Gulbuddin Hekmatyar (1)
Gun Control (249)
Guns (683)
Guns In National Parks (2)
Haditha Roundup (10)
Haiti (2)
HAMAS (7)
Haqqani Network (9)
Hate Mail (7)
Hekmatyar (1)
Heroism (4)
Hezbollah (12)
High Capacity Magazines (11)
High Value Targets (9)
Homecoming (1)
Homeland Security (1)
Horses (1)
Humor (13)
ICOS (1)
IEDs (7)
Immigration (39)
India (10)
Infantry (3)
Information Warfare (2)
Infrastructure (2)
Intelligence (22)
Intelligence Bulletin (6)
Iran (169)
Iraq (378)
Iraq SOFA (23)
Islamic Facism (33)
Islamists (38)
Israel (18)
Jaish al Mahdi (21)
Jalalabad (1)
Japan (2)
Jihadists (72)
John Nagl (5)
Joint Intelligence Centers (1)
JRTN (1)
Kabul (1)
Kajaki Dam (1)
Kamdesh (9)
Kandahar (12)
Karachi (7)
Kashmir (2)
Khost Province (1)
Khyber (11)
Knife Blogging (2)
Korea (4)
Korengal Valley (3)
Kunar Province (20)
Kurdistan (3)
Language in COIN (5)
Language in Statecraft (1)
Language Interpreters (2)
Lashkar-e-Taiba (2)
Law Enforcement (2)
Lawfare (6)
Leadership (5)
Lebanon (6)
Leon Panetta (1)
Let Them Fight (2)
Libya (11)
Lines of Effort (3)
Littoral Combat (7)
Logistics (48)
Long Guns (1)
Lt. Col. Allen West (2)
Marine Corps (230)
Marines in Bakwa (1)
Marines in Helmand (67)
Marjah (4)
MEDEVAC (2)
Media (22)
Memorial Day (2)
Mexican Cartels (21)
Mexico (25)
Michael Yon (5)
Micromanaging the Military (7)
Middle East (1)
Military Blogging (26)
Military Contractors (3)
Military Equipment (24)
Militia (3)
Mitt Romney (3)
Monetary Policy (1)
Moqtada al Sadr (2)
Mosul (4)
Mountains (10)
MRAPs (1)
Mullah Baradar (1)
Mullah Fazlullah (1)
Mullah Omar (3)
Musa Qala (4)
Music (16)
Muslim Brotherhood (6)
Nation Building (2)
National Internet IDs (1)
National Rifle Association (14)
NATO (15)
Navy (19)
Navy Corpsman (1)
NCOs (3)
News (1)
NGOs (2)
Nicholas Schmidle (2)
Now Zad (19)
NSA (1)
NSA James L. Jones (6)
Nuclear (53)
Nuristan (8)
Obama Administration (206)
Offshore Balancing (1)
Operation Alljah (7)
Operation Khanjar (14)
Ossetia (7)
Pakistan (165)
Paktya Province (1)
Palestine (5)
Patriotism (6)
Patrolling (1)
Pech River Valley (11)
Personal (17)
Petraeus (14)
Pictures (1)
Piracy (13)
Pistol (2)
Police (138)
Police in COIN (3)
Policy (15)
Politics (147)
Poppy (2)
PPEs (1)
Prisons in Counterinsurgency (12)
Project Gunrunner (20)
PRTs (1)
Qatar (1)
Quadrennial Defense Review (2)
Quds Force (13)
Quetta Shura (1)
RAND (3)
Recommended Reading (14)
Refueling Tanker (1)
Religion (79)
Religion and Insurgency (19)
Reuters (1)
Rick Perry (4)
Rifles (1)
Roads (4)
Rolling Stone (1)
Ron Paul (1)
ROTC (1)
Rules of Engagement (74)
Rumsfeld (1)
Russia (28)
Sabbatical (1)
Sangin (1)
Saqlawiyah (1)
Satellite Patrols (2)
Saudi Arabia (4)
Scenes from Iraq (1)
Second Amendment (143)
Second Amendment Quick Hits (2)
Secretary Gates (9)
Sharia Law (3)
Shura Ittehad-ul-Mujahiden (1)
SIIC (2)
Sirajuddin Haqqani (1)
Small Wars (72)
Snipers (9)
Sniveling Lackeys (2)
Soft Power (4)
Somalia (8)
Sons of Afghanistan (1)
Sons of Iraq (2)
Special Forces (23)
Squad Rushes (1)
State Department (17)
Statistics (1)
Sunni Insurgency (10)
Support to Infantry Ratio (1)
Survival (10)
SWAT Raids (52)
Syria (38)
Tactical Drills (1)
Tactical Gear (1)
Taliban (167)
Taliban Massing of Forces (4)
Tarmiyah (1)
TBI (1)
Technology (16)
Tehrik-i-Taliban (78)
Terrain in Combat (1)
Terrorism (87)
Thanksgiving (5)
The Anbar Narrative (23)
The Art of War (5)
The Fallen (1)
The Long War (20)
The Surge (3)
The Wounded (13)
Thomas Barnett (1)
Transnational Insurgencies (5)
Tribes (5)
TSA (10)
TSA Ineptitude (10)
TTPs (1)
U.S. Border Patrol (4)
U.S. Border Security (11)
U.S. Sovereignty (13)
UAVs (2)
UBL (4)
Ukraine (3)
Uncategorized (39)
Universal Background Check (3)
Unrestricted Warfare (4)
USS Iwo Jima (2)
USS San Antonio (1)
Uzbekistan (1)
V-22 Osprey (4)
Veterans (2)
Vietnam (1)
War & Warfare (210)
War & Warfare (40)
War Movies (3)
War Reporting (18)
Wardak Province (1)
Warriors (6)
Waziristan (1)
Weapons and Tactics (57)
West Point (1)
Winter Operations (1)
Women in Combat (13)
WTF? (1)
Yemen (1)

about · archives · contact · register

Copyright © 2006-2015 Captain's Journal. All rights reserved.