Download the pdf here. The plaintiffs’ (opposing the ban) based their opening salvo on the 14th amendment. (You might say they played the race card, but I couldn’t possibly comment.) “In 1868, our nation made a promise to the McDonald family that they and their descendants would henceforth be American citizens, and with American citizenship came the guarantee enshrined in our Constitution that no State could make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of American citizenship. The rights so guaranteed were not trivial. The Civil War was not fought because States were attacking people on the high seas or blocking access to the Bureau of Engraving and Printing. The rights secured by the Fourteenth Amendment were understood to include the fundamental rights honored by any free government and the personal guarantees of the –” And that’s it. Chief Justice Roberts cuts Alan Gura short with the usual argy-bargy about states’ rights. And then the lawyer gives freshly-minted Supreme Sotomayor a bitch slapping. So to speak . . .
Supreme Court Transcripts: Oral Arguments in McDonald v. City of Chicago Gun Ban Case
Question of the Day: Do Guns Have To Be So Macho?
Earlier this morning, I posted on a Huffington Post polemic by ex-federal judge H. Lee Sarokin. The New Jersey native painted gun owners as violent, pig-ignorant southerners. The portrait was unfair. Prima facie. It was also extremely unhelpful in the ongoing political debate between those who support the unfettered right to bear arms and those who’d prefer to create restrictive legislative caveats (i.e. limit that right). But is it entirely untrue that there’s a significant number of gun owners motivated by nothing more—or less—than machismo? YouTube is lousy with examples of testosterone-fueled gun enthusiasm, from Lego and Nerf-weapon wielding eight-year-olds, to teens leering and laughing at babes knocked off balance by double-barreled shotguns, to fat bastards demonstrating a-lot-less-than-military-grade “combat skills.” Gun sales literature appeals to the same instinctive desire to Alpha Dog out. Taurus’ decision to nickname their 451TKR-3SSR shotgun shell-firing handgun “The Judge” is both brilliant marketing and unintentionally illustrative. Hey, it’s a free country. But in the run-up to the Supreme Court decision on Chicago’s handgun ban, shouldn’t we be hearing more from mainstream gun owners? Or, perhaps, not. Could it be that there’s a Dirty Harry or Harriet inside every gun owner, trying to get out?
MD’s Gay Marriage Edict Fuels Concealed Carry Fervor
OK, this one’s a bit of a stretch. But I swear I’m not making it up. Start with this: yesterday, Maryland Attorney General Doug Gansler issued an opinion stating that Maryland may recognize gay marriages performed in other states. [53 page pdf here]. Setting aside the usual uproar about unconstitutional fiats, columnist Ann Miller then wonders, what about citizens with concealed carry permits from outside the state? Writing for Southern Maryland Online, curmudgeon Ron Miller takes up the newborn media meme. (What’s the bet Rush fools in?) “The right to keep and bear arms stands on much firmer legal footing than the redefinition of marriage, which is currently forbidden in 40 states. Therefore, we should ‘give full faith and credit to the laws of’ the 39 states that have ‘shall-issue’ laws, meaning state officials may not arbitrarily deny a citizen’s concealed-carry application.” Go on . . .
Federal Judge Ridicules Gun Rights Advocates
Before joining the Huffington Post as a columnist, Judge H. Lee Sarokin served in federal court for 20 years. To say Sarokin was a bit of a left-leaning activist judge—one of the six judges identified as such by presidential candidate Bob Dole—would be like saying that Imelda Marcos had a nice shoe collection. Most famously, Sarokin overturned the murder conviction of former boxer Rubin “Hurricane” Carter, after Bob Dylan, Denzel Washington and other liberal crusaders exploited championed his “cause.” Well, fair enough. But who knew that the 82-year-old Sarokin was such a nasty bastard? In an article entitled A Mythical Interview About Guns at Starbucks, Haddison uses the interview format to combine condescension, ignorance and prejudice to pen a putrid polemic. For one thing, the Garden State native presupposes that gun supporters are a bunch of stupid, homicidal rednecks . . .
Police Force Swapping Shotguns for Rifles
Another day (what already?), another police force swapping their shotguns for rifles. Panama City’s wmbb.com reports that the Walton Country Sheriff’s office is issuing AR-15 patrol rifles as its force’s standard gear. Sheriff Michael A. Adkinson, Jr. reckons his men and women need the firearms so they’re not “outgunned by the bad guys.” The department bought 160 ArmaLite model 15s with money provided by The Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance Grant Program (named after the New York City police officer assassinated in his car in 1988). The Bureau of Justice Assistance fund also picks-up the tab for rifle training, ammunition and vehicle mounts. “Before an AR-15 Patrol Rifle is issued, Walton County Sheriff’s Office Personnel must complete a rigorous, 20-hour class,” the TV station reports. “It includes both daylight and night shooting at the gun range. Those who do not initially qualify must go through remedial training at the gun range.” And THEN they qualify. So, is this a good idea?
New Extreme Shock™ Bullet – That’s GOT to Hurt
The key to making any bullet perform is it’s ability to expand when it contacts fluid. Typically, most organic targets contain approximately 65% – 75% water. Once an Extreme Shock™ bullet penetrates into soft tissue and impacts fluid, the defractor plate acts as a piston to force the bullet fragments out into the tissue at 90 degree angles to the entry channel.
With 100% energy transfer into the surrounding tissue mass, Extreme Shock™ projectiles begin to act similar to a shaped charge used against heavy equipment, such as, tanks, APC’s, and other armored targets. Once the bullet begins to expand, the Nytrilium particles pick up the surrounding tissue and ram it forward, EXPONENTIALLY increasing the frontal area of the projectile.
As the Nytrilium particles hit soft internal organs, they release the last amount of kinetic energy as they dissipate, creating literally thousands of wound channels.
Six Flags Discovery Kingdom Rifleman: Park Unprepared for Animal Escape
According to their website, Six Flags Discovery Kingdom in California has “a porcupine, an anteaters (sic), macaws and other fascinating creatures.” Which includes tigers. And cougars. And elephants. According to the park’s former “animal escape marksman,” Six Flags’ “armed crisis team” is understaffed and unprepared. Mercurynews.com reports that “Dale Udell of Fairfield was a former leader of the park’s rifle team, intended as a last resort in case a potentially dangerous animal gets loose and/or attacks . . . In 2008, the park’s rifle team had 14 members and engaged in regular training and drills, Udell said. He says the team was allowed to dwindle to two members and there have been no drills or training sessions in more than a year.” The park’s spinmeister denied the charge, insisting that the team had—uh “has” 10 shooters. Udell says its news to him. And if he’s right—if the team has been suddenly increased for PR purposes, that ain’t good.
UK Gun Owner Jailed for Two-and-a-Half Years for Overhead Warning Shots
The UK’s South Yorkshire Star reports that Andre John Hulse was plagued by burglars and vandals invading Low Lock Cottage, his “idyllic canalside cottage next to the River Don.” Speaking to melud at Doncaster Crown Court, Prosecutor Nicholas Neale said two young men (“respectable types”) started fishing nearby. “Hulse appeared, shouted abuse at them and then went back into his house for a shotgun which he fired twice above their heads. Police recovered three legally-held shotguns and a starting pistol from the cottage and the judge ordered the cancellation of his firearms certificate.” Fair enough you say? “Judge Patrick Robertshaw said the use of weapons in response to a grievance had reached epidemic proportions and sentences had to act as a deterrent. He added: ‘Whatever your problems in the past, it was a shotgun deliberately discharged by you twice in the general direction of two law-abiding individuals.'” Unless I’m missing something, some piece of prior history not revealed in this article, oh em gee. Mate.
Reader’s Gun: Smith & Wesson Model 410 Pistol
Having grown up around numerous firearms (most every member of my extended family is a gun owner), it was never really a question of if I would purchase my own gun, but when. Even though I had obtained a concealed carry permit in my early twenties, I didn’t bother purchasing a gun until I was 26 and worked in an extremely dangerous part of town. After doing a bit of research, I decided I wanted something with more capacity, stopping power, and safety than the .38 caliber revolvers most of my family carried. But I didn’t want to break the bank buying one. Beating the rush by exactly ten days, I walked into a local gun store and paid just over $400 for a brand-new Smith & Wesson Model 410 pistol on September 1, 2001.
Choosing a Handgun, Part II: Form Follows Function
There’s an old saying in the gun world: the best gun is the one you have. That’s nonsense. Well, kind of. Plenty of new handgun owners buy an overly powerful, over-large or ill-fitting handgun. They fire it a few times, get scared or hurt by the recoil and shelve the piece. To paraphrase one of Farago’s favorite expressions, the trick to handgun proficiency is to buy the right gun. And now that we’ve solved the semi-auto pistol versus revolver conundrum [see: Part I], it’s time to talk about what you plan to do with your new handgun. The answer to that question will point you towards a gun that you will use, master and maybe love. As you approach this buying decision, remember that no one gun fits every purpose or hand, and that manufacturers offer many different answers to the same questions. Confused? Let’s back up and start with purpose. What are you gonna do with your new gun?
Question of the Day: Are Armed Teachers the Answer to Spree Shooters?
The “gun debate” has two sides. On one side, gun control advocates believe that eliminating firearms from society (legal or illegal) makes it safer (“guns don’t kill people; people with guns kill people”). On the other end of the spectrum, firearms supporters believe that guns make individuals and society safer (“if guns are criminalized, only criminals will have guns”). So-called “spree shooting” at schools bring the issue into sharp focus. Unsurprisingly, the “near miss” at Deer Creek high school has reignited passions. To wit: I received an email this morning from the Front Sight Firearms Training Institute [click here for the full text of Give That Man A Gun! on their website]. If you expected a highly visible gun training organization to remain politically agnostic, boy were you (i.e. I) wrong. Not to put too fine a point on it, the improbably named Dr. Ignatius Piazza lets slip the dogs of war.