Articles by Herschel Smith

Seen here.

Plaintiffs have demonstrated a probability of success on the merits of their Second Amendment challenge to the relevant provisions of Chapter 131 Section 7(a), which criminalizes carrying handguns in certain “sensitive places,” subparts 12 (public libraries or museums), 15 (bars, restaurants, and where alcohol is served), 17 (entertainment facilities), and 24 (private property), as well as section 7(b)’s ban on functional firearms in vehicles. The State may regulate conduct squarely protected by the Second Amendment only if supported by a historical tradition of firearm regulation. Here, Plaintiffs have shown that Defendants will not be able to demonstrate a history of firearm regulation to support any of the challenged provisions. The deprivation of Plaintiffs’ Second Amendment rights, as the holders of valid permits from the State to conceal carry handguns, constitutes irreparable injury, and neither the State nor the public has an interest in enforcing unconstitutional laws. Accordingly, good cause exists, and the Court will grant the motion for temporary restraints. An accompanying order of today’s date shall issue.

The effects of Bruen continue to be felt.  This is the right decision.  These courts all know that they can be disciplined by the Supreme Court.

But this is just the beginning.  There will be hundreds more where necessary.  I predict the gun control laws will continue to fall, including AWB, magazine capacity limits, showing good character, ad numerous permitting schemes.

Furthermore, I expect constitutional carry to come up again in the South Carolina legislature.  I also expect constitutional carry to pass in Florida because they’ve committed to it on video now.  If this doesn’t include open carry then it will be a failure.

It’s good to see this one go down in the flames it should.  Trump and the ATF should be ashamed.  But I suspect both would defend it to this day and beyond.

Stephen Stamboulieh sends this my way a couple of days ago, but since then it has been covered by others (e.g., see Reason here and here, and reddit/Firearms here and here, and also, never forget the NRA’s position on bump stocks).

This is a very well-written and well-researched opinion and points out the distinction between a function of the trigger and function of the shooter.

Here is the opinion.

BLUF:

1. A bump stock does not turn a semiautomatic firearm into a machine gun by the statutory definition of machine gun.
2. Even if the Fifth Circuit is wrong, the ATF lacked the authority to make this change.
3. We have no business deferring to the authority of the federal regulators to make this determination since there is no lack of clarity on this issue.  The issue is perfectly clear – a rifle outfitted with a bump stock is not a machine gun.

Elsewhere, the ATF is becoming tepid over their upcoming rulemaking on unserialized firearms.

Yet the move, which the Justice Department described as a clarification of the regulation, is not without risk. Because the rule was created through executive action, rather than a statute validated by Congress, it has given companies confidence that they can keep selling individual gun parts.

Administration officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to publicly discuss possible litigation, said the new guidance would almost certainly be challenged in federal court on the grounds that it violates the Gun Control Act of 1968, which allows people to build firearms for their personal use without submitting to background checks or applying serial numbers.

Their upcoming rulemaking on unserialized firearms not only violates prior statutory law, it now suffers from the Fifth Circuit decision on bump stocks, which says that the ATF lacked the authority to inflict this new regulation on the American public.

Queue up the same thing for unserialized firearms.  And a thousand other lawsuits.

The only problem with the Fifth Circuit decision is that it applies only to states controlled by the Fifth Circuit.

Field & Stream has the backstory.  “A wildlife photographer named Slwomir Skukowski recently shared rare video footage of a mature wild boar fighting off a wolf pack in a Polish forest near the village of Mrzeżyno. The three-minute clip was filmed with a trail camera, and it’s amassed hundreds of thousands of views since Skukowski uploaded it to Youtube on December 13. It shows the big Eurasian boar thwarting multiple advances from at least seven wolves working in unison to bring it down.

In the video, the big hog is seen charging into the encircling wolf pack with reckless abandon. The wolves continue to approach the boar, but they never actually take it down—at least not in front of the camera. Eventually, the snorting pig scatters the canines, and they retreat to a nearby ridge before regrouping for another attack. Around the three minute mark, the wolves disperse and the clip cuts out.”

Of course, we don’t know what eventually happened, but it’s significant that one hog dispersed a pack of seven wolves, not once, but multiple times.  They are smart enough to know when there is danger of being gored by an animal that can run as fast as they can.

This is why you carry in the bush regardless of where you are.  In the Northwest it might be brown bears, but in the South it’s snakes, wild hogs and black bears.  There is danger everywhere.  Never go out in the bush without a sidearm.

Here is the video.

Here is a related video from the Southlands of the U.S.

Tenth Amendment Center.

Del. Bill Wiley (R) prefiled HB 1420 (HB1420) on Dec. 13. The legislation amends existing state law regarding prohibited concealed weapons to include the following:

For the sole purpose of carrying a concealed handgun, any person who carries a handgun anywhere he may lawfully carry a handgun openly within the Commonwealth and who is otherwise qualified under this article to obtain a concealed handgun permit. Such person shall not be required to meet the requirements of subsection B of § 18.2-308.02 or subsection B of § 18.2-308.06, as applicable, to carry a concealed handgun under this subdivision.

Currently, Virginia gun owners must apply to a city or county circuit court for a permit in order to conceal carry it in public under most circumstances.

Just like in my home state of North Carolina except it’s the CLEO who must approve.  Furthermore, purchasing a handgun requires a permit from the CLEO (of course, a CHP suffices for the five years it’s valid).  We’re an oddball state I must say.  I can’t recall the last time the voters handed the legislature to democrats, if ever since I’ve lived here.

But the legislature has to fight the governor’s mansion for just about everything.  I’m not sure of the makeup of the Virginia legislature, but I’d like to see them move forward while Youngkin is governor of the state.

If I have any readers in Virginia, please keep us posted on progress, and if possible, supply me with the email address of Mr. Wiley so I can stay in touch with him on this issue.

Prior: Virginia lawmakers could consider repeal of state gun laws

Outdoor Life has the story.

This information comes from PhD work at the University of Georgia (Blaise Newman, a PhD student at UGA) and which is sponsored by Sitka (which makes perfect sense).

See the link for the details, but here is the BLUF.  Avoid blues.  Avoid anything you might wash your gear or clothing in detergent containing UV brighteners.

What’s even more interesting is that a deer’s ability to see in the blue spectrum dictates where they move and when. Newman’s most recent project touched on this connection by tracking whitetail bucks in Florida with GPS collars and seeing how they moved through different landscapes at different times of day. She found that these bucks often chose to move through more open and brightly lit areas that reflected plenty of blue light including UV.

“They’re actually moving through an environment that makes it easier to detect you,” she says. “One way I always relate it is if you had the option to walk down a dark alley or a well-lit alley, which would you choose to move through?”

Newman also evaluated how deer move during low-light hours by hooking them up to an electroretinography machine and measuring their response to different light stimuli. (This is essentially the same technique that was used in the Deer Lab’s 1992 color vision study.) She found that deer were most sensitive to light and movement under twilight conditions, which supports the idea that deer are more active at dusk and dawn because that’s when their eyes function the best.

“One of the most interesting things we found is that deer eyes can detect the best, and are most sensitive, during twilight periods,” Newman says. “So, if you’ve been hunting all day just waiting for that buck to come by, and he’s finally coming out at twilight, you better be careful because his vision is the most sensitive it’s been all day.”

If deer vision seems inferior to ours, that’s only because we see the world through human eyes. As apex predators and tool developers, it’s beneficial for us to see in finer detail and to be able to recognize a wide range of colors. These subtleties aren’t so important to deer, though. Their eyes have evolved to prioritize detection over detail, and their abilities in this department are vastly superior to our own.

“Deer are a prey species,” Newman says. “Having detailed discrimination isn’t really important to deer. They just need to be able to detect and escape something.”

When it comes to color vision in particular, Newman explains that deer benefit from having less “chromatic noise.” By not having to process so many colors in the retina, their eyes can detect movement more quickly and easily. This means that deer can process visual cues much faster than humans do.

“They see motion at an astounding rate compared to our own ability,” she says. “The other aspect is temporal resolution—the time interval over which you integrate information—and their temporal processing just outstrips ours.”

Movement and blues give us away.

Orange, not so much.  It appears grey to them.

Ian is apparently currently on travel and brings us this interesting history lesson.

Surprising no one, if you haven’t been following the NY case of Ivan Antonyuk v. NY, the state of NY still hasn’t accepted Bruen, and won’t until the SCOTUS slaps them down again.  The federal district court ruled in favor of Antonyuk in a lengthy and well crafted decision that issued a stay on the recently enacted NY law, only to be blocked and held in abatement by the 2nd Circuit by a three-judge panel who said nothing about the merits of the decision.  The 2nd circuit overrode the district court decision with only a few cursory sentences.

The Antonyuk case was appealed directly to the supreme court, with Sotomayor demanding that NY reply.  They did with this brief.  In it, the state of NY insults the SCOTUS and tells them they aren’t needed.

NY to the Supreme Court

Friend of TCJ Stephen Stamboulieh, a terrific attorney, genuinely good man and defender of liberty, issued his reply, and it’s a wonderful thing to behold.

Stamboulieh to the Supreme Court in Response to NY

As Gandalf the Grey said (before he became Gandalf the White), “Until at last I smote my enemy and threw down his ruin upon the mountainside.”

This may not be over so the conclusory sentiment may be wrong, but may Stephen be victorious over his enemies and throw down their ruin upon the mountainside.

Before you dive into the video (and it’s a very good and informative video), I have some remarks.  Ignore them if you want to dive straight into the video.

First, QC is a subset of QA, QA being a function of not only QC testing, but engineering, management oversight, problem reporting and resolution, and so on.

Second, the word accuracy is the most misused word when concerning firearms.  Most of the time a rifle can be made accurate by adjusting the iron sights or optics.  What most people refer to when they say a rifle is accurate or not accurate is precision.  A small group on the target at the point of aim is both accurate and precise.  A large group at the point of aim is accurate but not precise.  A small group not at the point of aim is precise but not accurate, but can be made to be accurate by adjustments.  A large group not at the point of aim is both inaccurate and imprecise.  Accuracy can be adjusted into a rifle.  Precision cannot.  Precision is a function of the rifle and ammunition.  Precision has to do with repeatability and statistically similar outcomes with increasing sample size.

And that last point is important.  The Daniel Defense rifle did well compared to the Block II rifle, but they both suffered from imprecision.  They are not 1 MOA rifles.  Or are they?

With the right ammunition they both can be, as can be a lot of rifles that don’t shoot 1 MOA or better.  Mass produced military ammunition isn’t high QC grade ammunition.  To get good AR-15 ammunition requires buying those $1.50 – $2.00 rounds of .223 made by Hornady and other manufacturers who spend time and money on QC.

Both QA and QC costs money.  It costs as much as the component does in most cases.  If you want your rifle to be a 1 MOA or better gun, shoot high-QC ammunition.  That means the powder has been metered, the bullets are not out-of-round, the center of gravity (CoG) is located at the centroid or thereabouts, etc.  If you want to practice rapid fire, or fire under movement, purchase bulk military grade ammunition.  If you want to shoot with precision (smaller groups), buy high quality ammunition.  It will cost money.

Yes, barrel harmonics has something to do with all of this, as does machining tolerances, but the main point here is that good ammunition changes everything.  He proves that right up front in the video.

Outdoor Life.

Although domestic dogs are generally accepted as wolf descendants, wolves are a completely different animal. It’s easy to see why much of the general human population places wolves on a pedestal. They are wild, majestic, smart, and perceived as relatable, given our tight-knit relationship with domesticated canines. Wolves don’t care about your suppositions, however. Given the chance, they will kill your dog.

Some might think that wolves and dogs would be friends, but all it usually takes is your dog getting a single whiff of a wolf to convince you otherwise. Hell, wolves aren’t even friends with each other. Here in Alaska I spent several years skinning for a local fur buyer and put up hundreds of wolves. I had wolf smell on me all winter long and any domestic dog I encountered either got its hackles up or wet itself.

The late Outdoor Life contributor Jim Rearden’s book Alaska’s Wolf Man, about the famed Frank Glaser, elaborates on the subject. Years after encountering a pair of mixed wolf-dogs, Glaser captured a male wolf and bred his own wolf-dogs to pull sleds. He noted that they had the distinct smell of wolves, and any time he pulled into the small town of Healy, any loose dogs cleared the street at the smell and sight of them.

[ … ]

It’s not normal for wolves to attack humans, but it’s not unusual for them to kill domestic dogs—even in the backyard. Living in Fairbanks, Alaska, it’s never surprising to hear of wolves eating dogs “off the chain.” Another Fairbanks resident, John Reeves recently mentioned it on a Joe Rogan podcast appearance, and it’s true. When passing through the edges of populated areas, it’s not uncommon for wolves to prey on domestic dogs.

In 2007, there were packs of wolves in different parts of the Fairbanks area ravaging dog yards. A re-posted story written for the Fairbanks Daily News Miner by Tim Mowry that year talks about the winter of 1974-75 when wolves killed an estimated 165 dogs in the Fairbanks area.

There are some gruesome stories at the link.  I suppose there’s always the exception (at one minute into the video).

But it doesn’t matter whether the threat to my beast is a Coyote, Wolf or big cat.  I carry weapons and will use them to defend my family.

Recall that previous jerk in the Governor’s mansion in Virginia?  Yea, him.  Well, they may undo some of the bad he did in Virginia, and I expect Youngkin to sign such a bill if it can pass through the legislature.

House Bill 1428, pre-filed by Republican Del. Dave LaRock and state Sens. Amanda Chase and Frank M. Ruff, seeks to repeal an existing Virginia law that makes it unlawful for individuals to carry certain loaded semi-automatic center-fire rifles, pistols or shotguns on public streets, roads, alleys, sidewalks, public right-of-ways, public parks or “any other place of whatever nature that is open to the public” in certain parts of the state.

The existing law applies to the cities of Alexandria, Chesapeake, Fairfax, Falls Church, Newport News, Norfolk, Richmond and Virginia Beach and the counties of Arlington, Fairfax, Henrico, Loudoun and Prince William. The provisions in the law do not apply to law enforcement officers and licensed security guards, people with a valid concealed handgun permit or those engaged in lawful hunting or recreational shooting at established ranges.

LaRock also pre-filed House Bill 1427 earlier this month, which would remove a locality’s authority to prohibit the possession or carrying firearms in public parks and community centers owned by the locality, as well as public streets, alleys and sidewalks.

I’m glad I found this out – occasionally I’m in Virginia and thought that open carry was legal.  But yea, I can’t imagine the people in Prince William being okay with open carry.  Maybe if Virginia repeals this stupidity, it will be easier on open carriers as well as folks who don’t want to run afoul of the law depending on where they can’t carry.