Civil Rights

483 posts
Civil Rights

Oregon: Universal Background Checks and Datamining

Oregon recently passed a bill to mandate so-called universal background checks on private transfers of firearms.  One of the arguments we’ve made against the concept is that it will result in the creation of a gun registry.

This isn’t just a “slippery slope” argument.  The only way to enforce background checks on private transfers will be to know who had the guns before they were transferred.  That entails a registration.  Supporters of this legislation claim we’re full of hot air.

Well, it looks like that’s exactly what’s happening in Oregon.  Background checks are done on the state level there, and their system has been amended to require information on the transferor as well as the recipient.

The federal NICS system must purge all information on a check within 24 hours of a resolution.  It must be emphasized that this is not the case in Oregon.  According to the bill itself:

The department may retain a record of the information obtained during a request for a criminal background check under this section for the period of time provided in ORS 166.412 (7).

Continued...
Civil Rights

Lamenting the Inevitable

I suppose the rifle open-carry guys needed something to do.  They haven’t been in the news the last few months, so they decided to strut around recruiting offices in the wake of the Chattanooga shooting.

In Lancaster, Ohio, a guy named Christopher Reed had a negligent discharge in the parking lot.  Apparently, someone asked to see his rifle and he fired it while he was trying to clear it.

He has been charged with discharging a firearm within the city limits.  As it turns out, this isn’t his first rodeo.  He was convicted and fined $50 for a similar incident in 2013.

Way to go, Reed.  You’re on a roll.

“I’m nobody special,” Reed said in a telephone interview on Thursday.  “I’m just a guy doing my job because my own government wouldn’t do it.”

He downplayed what happened.  “It is what it is,” he said. “Nobody got hurt.”

Oh, OK.  

Continued...

Civil Rights

The Brady Check Loophole Isn’t

Let’s see if we can get this straight.  A loophole is defined as, “an error in the way a law, rule, or contract is written that makes it possible for some people to legally avoid obeying it.”  If somebody writes a law with a specific exemption, that exemption doesn’t qualify as a loophole.

The Brady Act regulates background checks on retail sales of firearms. Sarah Brady helped author and promote the law. She knows full well what’s in it.*

The Charleston shooter purchased a firearm at retail.  He lied on the form by failing to disclose he was an unlawful user of drugs.  Since the FBI dropped the ball when they should have entered his indictment into the NICS system, his purchase was not denied.

Continued...

Civil Rights

The Confederate Flag Thing

Charleston can a rough town.  They’ve got a dark history when it comes to race relations.

It’s sad that it took the murder of nine people at the hands of a neo-Nazi to get the world to notice that.  It’s even sadder that people think taking a stupid flag down will change anything.

Yes, I get it.  The Confederate flag isn’t strictly about slavery.  But like it or not, that flag is unavoidably tied to perceptions of dehumanization, oppression, and segregation.

Consider the svastika.  Hitler didn’t invent it.  He appropriated it for his uses, and it will forever be tainted by his association.  There’s no reclaiming it.  Even if I see it as a Jainist symbol for opportunity, there’s no way my Jewish or Polish friends want to see it.

So…yes, it’s time to consider taking it down from government offices.  It’s a symbol of a divisive and awful time in our history.

Continued...

Civil Rights

Victory in Puerto Rico

This one came in under the radar. An organization called Ladies of the 2nd Amendment in Puerto Rico brought a class-action suit challenging the Commonwealth’s permitting system.  They won.

In the Court of Salinas, Judge Lugo Anibal Irizarry ruled that Articles 2.01, 2.02, 2.04, 2.05 and 2.06 of the Arms Act failed constitutional scrutiny.  Most notably, he criticized the voucher system, stating “no fundamental right is taxable.”  While I doubt we can expect this decision to be quoted in continental cases, it’s nice to see an acknowledgement of that.

Residents may now carry firearms without needing to pursue a permit of any sort.  Additionally, there is no longer a licensing requirement for purchasing guns.

The last time I’d seen movement on the issue down there was 2011, in which they won two significant victories.  There isn’t a translation of the decision yet, but I’ve got feelers out.  I’ll post it as soon as it’s in my hands.

Continued...

Civil Rights E-cigarettes

H.R. 2058

The FDA is soon expected to extend its authority to all tobacco products. They consider electronic cigarettes and vaping products to fall into that category, so we could be looking at serious trouble for manufacturers.

Currently, products introduced prior to February of 2007 are grandfathered in under the doctrine of substantial equivalence.  Anything introduced later would have to go through an expensive and difficult approval process.  The problem is, the vast majority of vaping products were introduced after that date.

Rep. Tom Cole has introduced a bill that would move the “substantial equivalence” date for FDA deeming from 2007 to 2015, with a 21-month extension period. That means all vapor products currently on the market would be grandfathered in, as would any introduced in the following 2 years.

It’s not ideal by any reckoning.  I’d rather the FDA didn’t classify these products as tobacco, but that looks inevitable.

CASAA is supporting it, and you can contact your representative through Popvox.

Civil Rights

Shaheen Allen Pardoned

Shaheen Allen made the mistake of driving from Pennsylvania to New Jersey with a firearm in her car.  She was arrested, charged, and convicted of a felony under New Jersey’s Graves Act.  Initially, she was to face a mandatory 42 months in prison.  Public outcry led prosecutors to allow her entry into a diversionary program in lieu of prison time, but she remained a convicted criminal.

Governor Christie has now pardoned her.  His statement is here.  Happy ending, right?

Tell that to Steffon Losey-Davis, who has yet to receive the governor’s beneficence, or to any other victims of New Jersey’s gun laws.

There is nothing in Christie’s pardon, or in any public statement he’s made to date, to indicate that he finds the Graves Act unfair or unconstitutional.  I won’t hold my breath waiting, either.  He ran for office in 1995 in support of New Jersey’s “assault weapons” ban.

So, why the change in heart with Ms.

Continued...

Civil Rights

B. Todd Jones Resigns

B. Todd Jones has announced his resignation as director of the ATF, with only 11 days’ notice.  I don’t know if it has anything to do with the backlash from his plan to reclassify M855 ammunition as “armor piercing,” but the coincidence is hard to miss.  When he spoke to the Senate Appropriations committee last week, he had the look of a man who’d found himself dumped in the deep end of the pool.

To be honest, you couldn’t pay me to do his job.  Anyone taking the position inherits a plethora of troubles from an agency dogged by scandal.

Civil Rights

More Desperation

States United to Prevent Gun Violence is running a couple of surreal campaigns to push gun control.  The first is this little chestnut:

Never mind that it’s illegal to run a gun shop in New York without all sorts of licensing, or that it’s illegal for customers to even handle one without a purchase permit.  Since they’re gun control advocates, they can probably get away with the David Gregory defense.

They’ve also scored rapper Snoop Dogg, who is quite the paragon of civic virtue, to promote a separate campaign.

For an organization swimming in the Joyce Foundation’s cash, they’re certainly stooping quite low.

Civil Rights

ATF Holding Off on the M855 Ban. For Now.

From their website:

Although ATF endeavored to create a proposal that reflected a good faith interpretation of the law and balanced the interests of law enforcement, industry, and sportsmen, [yeah, sure…] the vast majority of the comments received to date are critical of the framework, and include issues that deserve further study. Accordingly, ATF will not at this time seek to issue a final framework. After the close of the comment period, ATF will process the comments received, further evaluate the issues raised therein, and provide additional open and transparent process (for example, through additional proposals and opportunities for comment) before proceeding with any framework.

Well, it’s nice to see my pessimism belayed a bit.  This isn’t over, though.  Keep pressure up on your legislators.

Civil Rights

The Obama Socialist Executive Ban on 5.56 Ammunition

That title is a decent approximation of how inaccurately the current situation has been described to me.  It’s 95% untrue.  The proposal at hand is not the result of legislation.  There is no executive order on the matter.  It is not a blanket ban on 5.56.  It only affects one specific loading.

Here’s the short explanation.  The 1985 Law Enforcement Officers Protection Act (LEOPA) delegated authority to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) to decide whether certain ammunition could be banned from civilian ownership if it is deemed “armor piercing.”  The criteria are quite specific:

A projectile or projectile core which may be used in a handgun and which is constructed entirely (excluding the presence of traces of other substances) from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium; or 

A full jacketed projectile larger than .22 caliber designed and intended for use in a handgun and whose jacket has a weight of more than 25 percent of the total weight of the projectile.

Continued...
Civil Rights

SAF Brings Suit against I-594

The press release is here. The filing itself is here [pdf].

Their argument is that I-594 is unconstitutional because it is too vague, both facially and as applied.

I-594, with its amendments to RCW 9.41 relating to non-commercial transfers of firearms, as well as Defendants’ enforcement of the same, prohibit, substantially interfere with, inhibit access to, and infringe upon the right to possess firearms and thus infringe Plaintiffs’ rights under the Second and Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution as well as the rights in Article I, Section 24 of the Washington State Constitution.

Specific examples of infringement include the criminalization of  shared firearms in the same home, the impractical burden on firearms training, and the inability to retake possession of a gun previously loaned to another.

They point out that the Washington State Patrol will not be enforcing the law because they can’t prove what is or isn’t a transfer.

Continued...

Civil Rights

Undeserved Celebrity

Apparently, all it takes to become an “activist” in 2014 is to get a Twitter account and make an insipid YouTube video. In a matter of days, this person has gone from being a selfie-obsessed nobody to an internet celebrity based on this video this video.

(The gun is actually a Crosman C-11 pellet gun, but that is a real charter school.)

Angry gun owners unwittingly fed into her narcissism, and even the CSGV has thrown its hat into the ring. Notice the conciliatory and respectful tone:

This was an audition for Michael Bloomberg’s money, and thanks to the outrage, she probably passed.

(This afternoon, she pulled down the original video and re-uploaded it at a different address. The link above is to the new address.)

Civil Rights

Vultures

3 comments

A group of families, organized by the law firm of Koskoff, Koskoff & Bieder, is planning to bring a wrongful death suit against Bushmaster Firearms because one of the company’s rifles was used in the Sandy Hook shooting. In theory, such a lawsuit would be forbidden by the Protection in Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. In practice, it’s not as clear.

A Bushmaster rifle was also used in the 2002 DC Beltway shootings. The Brady Campaign brought suit against them, and the company eventually settled. Doing so set a terrible precedent, and the lawyers smell blood in the water.

Koskoff, Koskoff & Bieder has taken a keen interest in product-liability lawsuits against gun manufacturers, and their campaign contributions run a close parallel to those of the Brady Campaign. I expect to see a statement from the latter supporting this in the coming days.

BTW, the screen grab in the header was from a loopy media campaign the Bradys did a few years back.

Continued...

Civil Rights

The Markus Kaarma Case

1 comment

Self-defense statutes commonly known as “stand your ground” laws have come under a great deal of scrutiny the last couple of years. Though not a stand your ground case, the George Zimmerman situation was quoted as proof that Florida’s law was unfairly biased against minorities. Michael Dunn’s attempt to cite the law in his defense made things even worse.

Now we’ve got a case in Montana that critics are attempting to lump into the same category. The issue at hand doesn’t involve stand your ground laws, which generally cover self-defense outside the home. Kaarma is claiming immunity under Montana’s castle doctrine law, which covers the defense of home.

Castle doctrine is a much older legal theory, and one about which there’s less controversy. It hinges on the idea that there are certain privileges and immunities regarding the use of force in defense of the home. However, Montana’s law is quite clear that lethal force is only allowable to prevent an assault or forcible felony.

Continued...

Civil Rights

No Justice, No Peace

That very slogan is a mockery of our system of justice. The protesters demanded a grand jury, and they got it. It turns out the eyewitnesses were unreliable, and the physical evidence shows no criminal activity on Officer Wilson’s part. The system did its job.

Many of those calling for an indictment never cared about the process. They simply care about punishment. They want someone to suffer, and they assume that will happen if they get enough people to scream. They believe that public opinion should drive criminal proceedings.

This tendency towards vengeance is the basest of human instincts, and it’s exactly what our system of justice is designed to counter. The very definition of justice is not the whim of a mob.

There are some serious issues with law enforcement in Ferguson. Why is a majority black community policed by a force that’s overwhelmingly white?

Continued...

Civil Rights Ordnance

More on Pistol Braces

I’ve been over the issue of pistol stabilizing braces before. Attaching one to a pistol is perfectly legal. It is also legal to use it as a shoulder stock, though that’s not the intended purpose. The BATFE issued a very specific letter to clarify this.

Black Aces Tactical recently manufactured a shotgun with the brace, and they’ve been informed that this is impermissible. People are now under the impression that this affects all uses. That is not the case.

The answer is simple and short. In legal terms, a shotgun is not a pistol. They are two different things.

As per 18 U.S.C., § 921(A)(5), a shotgun is defined as,

a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder and designed or redesigned and made or remade to use the energy of an explosive to fire through a smooth bore either a number of ball shot or a single projectile

A shotgun is a smoothbore weapon designed to be fired from the shoulder.

Continued...

Civil Rights

Jay Leno Weasels Out

Jay Leno was scheduled to speak at the 2015 SHOT show but has cancelled under pressure from gun-control groups. This came from his spokesperson:

When it came to his attention that this was actually a pro-gun lobby show, he immediately cancelled his appearance. He found out that it was not what he was originally told it was, and he decided to cancel.

OK, what else would the National Shooting Sports Foundation be? I find it incomprehensible that he would be ignorant of that, or of what the SHOT Show promotes. He could at least have been honest about it.

The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence (formerly the National Coalition to Ban Handguns) had this to say:

The writing is now on the wall for celebrities who would consider getting in bed with the gun lobby: Don’t do it. Because if you do, your reputation and brand will be damaged forever, without repair.

Continued...
Civil Rights

I-594: Curios and Relics

6 comments

The ATF has long recognized that certain firearms fall into a category known as “curios and relics.” As defined, this includes weapons that “are of special interest to collectors by reason of some quality other than is associated with firearms intended for sporting use or as offensive or defensive weapons.” Most are firearms over 50 years old, or for which the value is historical rather than functional.

Collectors of curios and relics (C&R) can acquire a Type 3 FFL, which allows them to bypass some of the transfer requirements of the Gun Control Act and Brady Act. To the best of my knowledge (and please prove me wrong), Borchardt pistols and Clement carbines are hardly the preferred weapons of gang violence and mass shootings.

But folks in Washington state decided to do things their own way. Whether through haste or design, I-594 now makes it pointless to hold a C&R license there.

Continued...

Civil Rights

Hollis v. Holder

2 comments

A guy named Jay Aubrey Isaac Hollis has started a crowdfunding campaign. His goal is to bring litigation against Attorney General Holder on the grounds that the National Firearms Act and 1986 Hughes Amendment are unconstitutional.

In short, he submitted a Form 1 to the BATFE for approval to build a machine gun for personal use, even though it’s illegal for him to do so. Somewhere along the line, somebody got their wires crossed, and it was approved. The BATFE recognized the error and revoked their approval the same day.

Mr. Hollis seems to think this is his big Mr. Smith Goes to Washington moment, and he’s presenting a batch of Hail Mary passes to the Northern District court in Texas. Seriously, this is what he asks for in the opening pages:

  • overturning Wickard v. Filburn
  • declaring “unjust taking” under the 5th Amendment because an erroneous approval was reversed
  • applying strict scrutiny to all matters involving the 2nd Amendment, despite the fact that most Circuit courts have rejected the idea
  • revisiting the legislative process behind the passage of the Hughes Amendment

This guy is going to crash and burn in oral arguments, and we’ll all suffer for it. 

Continued...
Civil Rights

I-594: A Recipe for Disaster

2 comments

It only cost $13 million, but Washington State voters have passed a bill [pdf] mandating “universal” background checks for all transfers of firearms. This is bad law. It will punish those whose only failing was not knowing its stipulations in detail, and it will do nothing to deter crime.

Under the law, a transfer is pretty much any situation in which possession of a gun changes. It doesn’t just cover the sale of firearms–a transfer occurs whenever someone besides the registered owner is in possession of the gun. So, “hold my rifle while I tie my shoes” is a transfer. If a background check hasn’t been done, with a licensed dealer as the intermediary, both parties commit a gross misdemeanor.

I’m afraid it’s going to take a few innocent people getting thrown in jail or losing their right to own guns in Washington before the defects of this law come to light.

Civil Rights

On Referendums

1 comment

The Republicans are looking to pick up six or more seats in the Senate tonight. Mitch McConnell looks to be winning in Kentucky, and he’ll probably replace Harry Reid as majority leader.

Tomorrow morning, the Republicans are going to be basking in optimism and satisfaction. That would be a tremendous mistake. They need to have viable plans in place right now, or they’ll be back in the wilderness in two years.

Pundits are calling this election a referendum on the President and his policies. That’s not the case. If anything, that would have been the 2010 election. The “take back our country” rhetoric and tricorner hats won Republicans a few seats, but the Tea Party forked the message and turned their narrow majority into a tool for little more than squabbling obstructionism. They seemed to think the public didn’t notice.

Next came claims they’d take the White House in 2012. That didn’t happen.

Continued...

Civil Rights

Henderson v. United States

The Supreme Court granted cert to this one last night. At issue is the disposition of a person’s firearms once he’s convicted of a felony.

The question presented is whether such a conviction prevents a court under Rule 41(g) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure or under general equity principles from ordering that the government (1) transfer non-contraband firearms to an unrelated third party to whom the defendant has sold all his property interests or (2) sell the firearms for the benefit of the defendant. The Second, Fifth, and Seventh Circuits and the Montana Supreme Court all allow lower courts to order such transfers or sales; the Third, Sixth, Eighth and Eleventh Circuits, by contrast, bar them.

Henderson’s argument is here [pdf].

The government’s response is here [also pdf].

I have little doubt this will be dubbed a “felons with guns” case or somesuch, but that would be inaccurate. Henderson does not assert that he is entitled to keep his firearms:  he is claiming that he has the right to compensation upon surrendering them.

Civil Rights

Eric Holder Resigning

It may seem like odd timing, but it makes a perverse sort of sense. Come Monday, the Department of Justice will be required to release documents they previously withheld from Congress during the Fast & Furious investigation. Holder may be trying to distance himself from whatever fallout might ensue, but he remains in contempt of Congress for that bit of obstruction.

While it looks like he’ll escape any consequences from that (and it has for some time), one can only hope this will haunt his professional life. Two American law-enforcement officers and over 150 Mexicans died as a result of a botched operation that took place on his watch.

As it stands, we’ve got a midterm election coming up, and there’s a possibility of the Senate changing hands in January. If that’s the case (and I’m not sold on it), the President will have a difficult time appointing a favorable successor.

Continued...

Civil Rights

DC Has a Carry Law, and It’s Terrible

In response to their recent court loss in Palmer v. DC, the District of Columbia has drafted a law [pdf] allowing civilians to carry firearms. The city council is doing their best to flaunt the court order without veering into direct contempt, much as they did following the Heller decision.

Essentially, one might be able to get a permit to carry in the District, but the bill is structured in such a way as to make it virtually useless. Here are the major provisions:

Applicants must demonstrate “a good reason to fear injury” and “a special need for self-protection distinguishable from the general community.” Applicants must provide documented evidence of their plight. Said evidence may not be enough to sway the issuing authorities, who can deny the existence of a special need on a whim.

Applicants have to complete a course certified by the Chief of Police that includes at least 16 hours of training.

Continued...

Civil Rights

Sensenbrenner Wants to Shut Down the ATF

So, we’ve got a proposal on the table [pdf] to break up the ATF and fold its responsibilities into other law-enforcement agencies. The idea is to give the FBI authority to enforce firearms regulations while giving the alcohol/tobacco stuff over to the DEA.

I’d love to see it happen. Homer Cummings’ little post-Prohibition revenue collection agency has grown into the arbiter of our firearms laws, and it would be a gross understatement to say they’ve done a horrendous job of it.

This is the agency that funneled guns across the border to Mexico in the Fast & Furious operation, who distributed swag to their agents emblazoned with “ATF: Always Think Forfeiture,” and who were responsible for the debacles at Ruby Ridge and Waco.

Then there’s the problem of their “whites only” Good Ol’ Boys Roundup, which lasted more than a decade before being shut down.

Beyond the abuses lies the issue of gross incompetence.  

Continued...

Civil Rights

ATF Pushing Ahead with 41P

A year ago, the President advanced a number of regulatory proposals on gun control. One of the more esoteric ones involved changing the way trusts are handled in regards to NFA firearms.

The original action date was to have been last June, but the BATFE was deluged with comments. While action appeared to have been pushed back to 2015, the Bureau has recently published a draft form [pdf].

Essentially, any “responsible party” of a trust or corporation must now file this form and seek approval from local law enforcement. That approval is impossible to obtain in many areas.

The BATFE stands to gain nothing. They’re saddled with the paperwork, but it doesn’t generate any revenue. As such, I doubt they’ll hire on more examiners to address the workload. The end result will be an exponential growth in wait times for NFA approvals across the board.

There’s no saying when 41P might be enacted, but I wouldn’t be surprised if the administration wants to rush this one in before the midterms so they can show some success on gun control.

Civil Rights

Dear ISIS

Any time you want to stop the killings and coerced “conversions” of Christians would be great. For a bunch of guys who claim to be acting on the tenets of God or Muhammad, you’re defying both.

Consider Muhammad’s covenant with the monks of St. Catherine’s:

No compulsion is to be on them. Neither are their judges to be removed from their jobs nor their monks from their monasteries. No one is to destroy a house of their religion, to damage it, or to carry anything from it to the Muslims’ houses. Should anyone take any of these, he would spoil God’s covenant and disobey His Prophet. Verily, they are my allies and have my secure charter against all that they hate.

Further, from the Pococke translation:

Whosoever shall annul any of one of these my decrees, let him know positively that he annuls the ordinance of God. (…) No one shall bear arms against them, but, on the contrary, the Muslims shall wage war for them.

Continued...
Civil Rights

Fast & Furious: Unexpected Progress

Two years ago, Attorney General Eric Holder was held in contempt of Congress. At issue was his refusal to turn over documents crucial to the investigation of the ATF’s disastrous Fast & Furious operation. The President invoked executive privilege and refused to turn over the information.

Shortly after, the website Judicial Watch made an Freedom of Information Act request for those documents. Nothing came of it, so they filed a lawsuit in September of 2012. That lawsuit was decided earlier this month by U.S. District Court Judge John Bates, who ruled that the Department of Justice must provide a Vaughn index of the relevant documents.

The Supreme Court established the concept of the Vaughn index in Vaughn v. Rosen. An agency that wishes to withhold information must provide a detailed index and description of the information, state the statutory exemption claimed, and they must explain how disclosure would damage their interests.

Continued...

Civil Rights

10th Circuit Upholds Multiple Long Gun Reporting

In 2011, the ATF began requiring dealers in Southwestern border states to report sales of multiple semiautomatic rifles to individual purchasers. The ATF doesn’t have the authority to do this.* As such, the requirement has been challenged in the DC and 5th Circuit courts, but it was upheld in both instances.

Today, the 10th Circuit issued a ruling [pdf] affirming them.

Among the lovely chestnuts of wisdom was this:

A review of Project Gunrunner conducted by the Office of the Inspector General (“OIG”) indicates that tracing guns seized in Mexico can provide “crucial” information in gun-trafficking investigations and generate intelligence regarding trends in gun smuggling. (…) [Assistant Director of Field Operations William Hoover] explained that trace information helps ATF “reconstruct the flow of weapons along the border, how and where they are being purchased, and who is purchasing them.”

Yeah, because that worked so well when Project Gunrunner was active.

* Here’s the multiple-handgun form [pdf].

Continued...

Civil Rights

Can We Now Carry in DC?

Miller has been involved with this for quite some time. She has more on the issue here. Lanier has also instructed police to allow any qualified nonresident to carry in the District.

(Edit: here’s Lanier’s actual order [pdf])

Here’s the first catch: nonresidents are free to carry, but DC residents can only carry a gun that’s registered there.  The registry in DC has been closed since 1976. The Supreme Court’s ruling in Heller was supposed to change that, but it’s still virtually impossible to get a handgun in the District. Gun shops are prohibited by zoning laws, so residents can’t buy a handgun directly. There is only one FFL willing to transfer handguns in from out of state.

Continued...

Civil Rights

Palmer v. D.C.

In 2008, the Supreme Court ruled that Washington D.C. could not ban the ownership of handguns. The city responded by passing the hysterically-named Firearms Registration Emergency Amendment Act [pdf]. It created as many hurdles as legally feasible for would-be gun owners. and it prohibited the carry of firearms outside the home.

Alan Gura brought this case in response to the ban on carry. The District Court did its best to ignore it for two years. In 2011 Chief Justice Roberts intervened and ordered Judge Scullin to hear it. Then it seemed to disappear again.

As such, it goes without saying that today’s opinion [pdf] was unexpected. Cue the highlight reel:

In light of Heller, McDonald, and their progeny, there is no longer any basis on which this Court can conclude that the District of Columbia’s total ban on the public carrying of ready-to-use handguns outside the home is constitutional under any level of scrutiny.

Continued...
Civil Rights

Beretta Snubs Manchin

Beretta recently announced they’re moving their manufacturing operations to Tennessee. Maryland’s gun laws were quoted as the main reason.

Several states courted their business, including West Virginia. Beretta explicitly rejected West Virginia because of Senator Manchin’s actions in furthering the “universal” background check law in 2013.

From their statement, courtesy of Sebastian:

Before considering any other location for expansion of any of our facilities we consider first the consistency with which a given state has supported Second Amendment rights. (…) Regrettable [sic], as a consequence of that analysis and especially due to Senator Manchin’s recent legislative choices we have decided not to consider your state for future plans of expansion.

I’ve said before that Manchin and Toomey need to feel the heat for buckling under pressure, and it looks like someone’s holding them to it. Let’s hope the voters follow suit.

Civil Rights

Christie and Clinton are both doomed in 2016

They are both losing in the polls to Boba Fett and Darth Vader.

Joe Biden fared worse than Emperor Palpatine, and only a little better than Jar Jar Binks.

Jar Jar Binks, people.

And what of Rick Perry? Elizabeth Warren? It’s not pretty, folks.

My prediction: David Hasselhoff enters the race late in the game under the Green Party ticket and sweeps the election. Gary Hart will be his running mate.

Civil Rights Ordnance

About the Import Ban

2 comments

Yesterday, the President signed an executive order that places Concern Kalashnikov (formerly Izhmash) on the Specially Designated Nationals (SDN) list. That means the importation of their products has been banned. It’s rare for these orders to be rescinded, even by later administrations, so it’s probably permanent.

Somebody’s going to scream “back door gun control,” but that isn’t the case. This is a sanction on the Russian government for their actions in Ukraine. While the SDN list blocks assets and generally forbids Americans from dealing with the entity in question, products that have already been imported and paid for are unaffected.

How does this affect the domestic market? Not much at all. If you owned one before the order was signed, you can keep it. You can also sell it if you like. Retailers with existing inventory can do so as well.

Does this mean there’s going to be a shortage of rifles marketed as “AK-47’s?”

Continued...

Civil Rights

And Now Target

Target department stores have been the latest battleground in the public-image war between Moms Demand Action and the Texas open-carry rangers. The tone-deaf actions of the latter have already cost us on several fronts. As of today, it has happened again:

Our approach has always been to follow local laws, and of course, we will continue to do so. But starting today we will also respectfully request that guests not bring firearms to Target — even in communities where it is permitted by law.

We’ve listened carefully to the nuances of this debate and respect the protected rights of everyone involved. In return, we are asking for help in fulfilling our goal to create an atmosphere that is safe and inviting for our guests and team members.

This is a complicated issue, but it boils down to a simple belief: Bringing firearms to Target creates an environment that is at odds with the family-friendly shopping and work experience we strive to create.

Continued...
Civil Rights

This Won’t Be Won in the Courts

Last year, the Colorado legislature hastily passed a package of gun regulations. The new laws include a ban on all magazines capable of holding more than 15 rounds, and the requirement that all transfers of firearms between individuals go through a gun dealer and be subject to a background check. To say this was an unpopular decision with the voters would be an understatement.

Two sitting state Senators were recalled from office, and a third resigned in the face of an impending recall. The Governor himself seems to regret signing it.

A large group of plaintiffs brought a lawsuit, but the Colorado District Court has ruled that both laws are constitutional [pdf].

(…) the Court finds that although § 18-12-302 burdens the operation of semiautomatic weapons, the burden is not severe because it does not materially reduce the ability of a person to use a semiautomatic firearm for self-defense, nor does it reduce the effectiveness of self-defensive efforts [p.

Continued...
Civil Rights

Hickenlooper Goes on the Defensive

The headline reads, “Colorado governor tries to apologize for gun control measures, blames staff, then curses.” That’s actually a pretty good summary of the situation. Video of his statement is here.

You may recall that 55 of the 62 elected sheriffs in Colorado brought a suit to challenge the constitutionality of the gun-control bills Hickenlooper signed last year. You may also recall that state Senators Morse and Giron were ousted in a historic recall election over those bills, and that Senator Hudak resigned just as she was about to be recalled.

Now, when he has to save face, he tries to spread the blame and claim he just didn’t realize what a “kerfuffle” his signature would cause. Really? Does the fact that Michael Bloomberg bent him over a metaphorical barrel to sign them not suggest there might be some friction? Does the fact that the bills passed along strict party lines not imply some dissent?

Continued...

Civil Rights

Abramski v. United States

While technically a gun case, this one hasn’t generated much press. At issue is a purchase of a pistol Bruce Abramski made on behalf of his uncle. Mr. Abramski was prosecuted for making a “false of fictitious” statement in regards to the actual buyer of the firearm.

Under 18 USC §922(a)(6) it is unlawful to mislead a dealer regarding the actual identity of the purchaser of a firearm. Ostensibly, this is to prevent “straw purchases,” which are a major source of crime guns. The classic example is this:

Bob is legally disqualified from owning a firearm. Bob gives Steve money, and Steve buys the firearm on Bob’s behalf. Steve is a bad man who has just provided a bad person with a gun and he should feel bad.

Except that’s not accurate. Even if it was legal for Bob to own the gun in question, Steve would be committing a crime by claiming to be the actual buyer.

Continued...

Civil Rights

Guam Goes Shall-Issue

The governor of Guam has signed Bill No. B296-32 [pdf] into law. As per Section 2, the police “shall issue a license” to carry a firearm if the applicant meets the requirements, which are fairly lenient. Aside from being legally eligible to own a gun, applicants must show some proof of training, which can be satisfied by a hunter safety course, an NRA course, or a DD214.

So, the requirements are basically the same as getting a permit in Florida. Guam falls under the appellate jurisdiction of the 9th Circuit, and they may be feeling the pressure after the Peruta ruling.

Guns Save Lives has more information on this.