Back in the 1990's, I used to see these things at gun shows from time to time, but I didn't think anyone actually bought them. I certainly don't expect to see anyone with a lick of common sense wearing one.  Yet, I saw three of these things this weekend.

I can't emphasize enough what a bad idea they are.

Her name is Barbara, but her friends call her Barbie.  I am not kidding; she told me this herself.  She's in her mid-40's, fake blonde and not very bright.  At some point, someone did Barbie the disservice of telling her she could cruise through life on her looks alone.

Under some circumstances, I could almost pity her.

That is, unless she's waving a loaded .357 Magnum in my face.

Well, it can shoot; I'll give it that.

Now for my complaints:

the front sight is hard to keep in focus,
I can't get all my fingers on the grip, and
it's a bit snappy on recoil.

Yeah, I'm being smarmy.  These things are par for the course with any snubnose revolver.

It's amazing how quickly this came to a head.  I'd just heard about it a few days ago, and as of yesterday, the Brady Campaign and their ilk were in full panic mode over it with the media.  Last night, Fox News was running a constant ticker about it over their program.

Then came the vote today. 

We lost by two votes.

Two.

In a Democrat-controlled Senate.

We may have lost this one, but look at the circumstances.  This never would have been imaginable ten years ago.  Heck, it never would have seemed feasible at any point in modern times.

The winds are changing.  Harry Reid voted for it.  So did Russ Feingold, as well as Democratic Senators from Alaska, Montana, Arkansas, Colorado, Virginia (both Senators), and Arizona.

SA 1618 is an amendment to S. 1390, a bill authorizing appropriations for the Department of Defense for the 2010 fiscal year.  The amendment seeks,

[t]o amend chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, to allow citizens who have concealed carry permits from the State in which they reside to carry concealed firearms in another State that grants concealed carry permits, if the individual complies with the laws of the State.

There are 21 cosponsors including Johnny Isakson of Georgia and Orrin Hatch of Utah.

Naturally, the Left is pissed, which means it stands a chance.

The ATF has fired its first shot across the bow (pdf) regarding the Firearms Freedom Act that passed last month in Tennessee.  In a letter recently sent to Tennessee Federal Firearms License (FFL) holders, they stated:

The passage of the Tennessee Firearms Freedom Act (…) has generated questions from industry members as to how this State law may affect them while engaged in a firearms business activity. (…) However, because the Act conflicts with Federal firearms laws and regulations, Federal law supersedes the Act, and all provisions of the Gun Control and the National Firearms Act, and their corresponding regulations, continue to apply.

The remainder of the brief memorandum simply reiterates the basic responsibilities of FFL's.

So far, it's just a "friendly" reminder. What happens this winter, when the Act takes place in several states, remains to be seen.

Senator Leahy put Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor on the spot today, and her answers don't surprise me in the least.  She paid the expected lip-service to the Heller decision:

Like you, I understand that how important the right to bear arms is to many, many Americans. In fact, one of my godchildren is a member of the NRA. And I have friends who hunt. I understand the individual right fully that the Supreme Court recognized in Heller.

All well and good, but her answers regarding her decision in Maloney v. Cuomo are a bit questionable.  As with Ricci v. DeStefano, she chose to defer rather blindly to precedent rather than risk making waves:

In Supreme Court province, the right is not fundamental. It's a legal term. It's not talking about the importance of the right in a legal term. It's talking about is that right incorporated against the states. (…) My decision in Maloney and on any case of this type would be to follow the precedent of the Supreme Court when it speaks directly on an issue.

This is where it gets a bit slippery.  There are some precedents that are so disastrous, so detrimental to liberty, that they must be defied, even before they are overturned.  Two of those–the Slaughterhouse Cases and United States v. Cruikshank–will be tested before the Court next term.

I got several questions about this today, and I thought I'd clarify.  As of November, you must be 21 years old to receive a frame or receiver for a firearm.  It doesn't matter if it's to be used to make a rifle or a handgun; it's now treated in a similar manner as a handgun.

Congress didn't pass a law while we weren't looking, nor did the ATF sneak a regulation in under the radar.  This is simply a clarification and enforcement of a clause buried in Code section 922, which states:

[It shall be unlawful for any licensed importer,

…

158gr lead wadcutters over 7.5gr of Hodgdon HS-6.  These are an outgrowth of a self-defense load developed by a friend, which consisted of a 125gr XTP bullet over 8gr of the same powder.

I was absolutely smitten with Chris Clark's 2006 album, Body Riddle.  It didn't grab me immediately, but with time, it grew to be one of my favorite records released that year.

Last year's Turning Dragon left me a bit cold.  The reclusive genius of previous records had become quite the extrovert for a change.  Much of the abstraction and complexity of his previous worked had been toned down in favor of more danceable, and dare I say, sunny material.

So, with Totems Flare, I had no clue which way he'd go.  Turns out he went both ways at once, and with striking results.

California Attorney General and former Presidential Candidate Edmund "Jerry" Brown has submitted an Amicus Curiae brief (pdf), asking the Supreme Court to hear the joint NRA and SAF suits against Chicago.  At first, it seems surprising and perhaps a bit heartening, but don't worry, Brown's got an agenda here.

It opens with the pronoucement:

(…) unlike many states, California has no state constitutional counterpart to the Second Amendment. Unless the protections of the Second Amendment extend to citizens living in the States as well as to those living in federal enclaves, California citizens could be deprived of the constitutional right to possess handguns in their homes as affirmed in District of Columbia v. Heller.

He points out that the Heller ruling failed, "to establish a standard of review applicable to asserted Second-Amendment infringements," which is correct.  He also concurs with Halbrook and Gura that the current schism between the 9th Circuit and other circuit courts on the matter of incorporation can only be settled by the Supreme Court.

The group known as Iowans for the Prevention of Gun Violence has closed up shop, citing a loss of funding.  According to Director Rex Honey,

There was a grant with the Joyce foundation for a period of close to a decade from the mid 90s well into this decade, and that funding did end.  That meant we could no longer hire staff, so everything was done on a volunteer basis.

The Joyce Foundation provided IPGV with $400,000 in grants in 2003, but as of 2007, their net income was only $13,927 (pdf).  They also received funds from the Freedom States Alliance, a major Joyce beneficiary.