NSSF And SAAMI Sue California To Stop Microstamping

The National Shooting Sports Foundation and the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers' Institute filed suit in Fresno Superior Court today. They are seeking a preliminary injunction against California's microstamping law calling it unworkable.

You may remember that last year California Attorney General Kamala Harris certified the microstamping was no longer covered by patent protection. As a result, all new firearms that weren't previously on the California Handgun Roster now must be microstamped. Any design changes a manufacturer makes to an existing firearm would then require it to be recertified and thus have a microstamp on its firing pin.

The release from NSSF and SAAMI is below:

NEWTOWN, Conn. – The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) and the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers' Institute (SAAMI) have filed a motion for a preliminary injunction on behalf of their members against the State of California in Fresno Superior Court to prevent enforcement of the state's microstamping law. The state statute enacted in 2007, but not made effective until May 2013, requires that all semiautomatic handguns sold in the state not already on the California approved handgun roster incorporate unproven and unreliable microstamping technology.

Under this law, firearms manufacturers would have to micro laser-engrave a gun's make, model and serial number on two distinct parts of each handgun, including the firing pin so that, in theory, this information would be imprinted on the cartridge casing when the pistol is fired.

“There is no existing microstamping technology that meets the requirement of this ill-considered law. It is not technologically possible to microstamp two locations in the gun and have the required information imprint onto the cartridge casing. In addition, the current state of the technology cannot reliably, consistently and legibly imprint on the cartridge primer the required identifying information from the tip of the firing pin, the only possible location where it is possible to micro-laser engrave the information, said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF senior vice president and general counsel.

“The holder of the patent for this technology himself has written that there are problems with it and that further study is warranted before it is mandated. A National Academy of Science review, forensic firearms examiners and a University of California at Davis study reached the same conclusion and the technical experts in the firearms industry agree,” Keane said. “Manufacturers cannot comply with a law the provisions of which are invalid, that cannot be enforced and that will not contribute to improving public safety. Today, we are seeking injunctive relief against this back-door attempt to prevent the sale of new or upgraded semiautomatic handguns to law-abiding citizens in California.”

In 2007, California Assembly Bill 1471 was passed and signed into law requiring microstamping on internal parts of new semiautomatic pistols. The legislation provided that this requirement would only became effective if the California Department of Justice certified that the microstamping technology is available to more than one manufacturer unencumbered by patent restrictions. The California legislature subsequently reorganized certain statutes concerning the regulation of firearms, including the microstamping law in 2010. On May 17, 2013, Attorney General Kamala D. Harris provided such certification.

Smith & Wesson and Sturm Ruger have separately announced that they would no longer be selling new or improved semiautomatic handgun models in California because of the impossibility of complying with the new law.

The notice that NSSF and SAAMI would be seeking a preliminary injunction can be seen here.

There Are Amicus Briefs And Then There Is This One

Amicus briefs are intended to be a way for interested parties to point out relevant aspects of the law to the judges or justices hearing a case. In the Second Amendment realm, the pro-2A amicus briefs come from the NRA, the Second Amendment Foundation, GOA, or other groups or individuals interested in securing the right to keep and bear arms. Conversely, the amicus briefs from those who take a more restrictive view would come from the Brady Campaign, the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, and others of their ilk. All of these briefs tend to cite relevant law pro or con to support their arguments. Even the best written of them tend to be, to put it politely, boring.

But what about in other constitutional realms? They, too, tend to be boring. Thus, the brief submitted by the Cato Institute and P. J. O'Rourke in support of the petitioners in the case of Susan B. Anthony List, et al v. Steven Driehaus, et al stands out. It is, frankly, a hoot to read. While ostensibly written by Ilya Shapiro of the Cato Institute, one gets the feeling that it was heavily edited by P. J. O'Rourke. How else could you explain the first footnote?

Pursuant to this Court’s Rule 37.3(a), letters of consent from all parties to the filing of this brief have been submitted to the Clerk. Pursuant to this Court’s Rule 37.6, amici state that this brief was not authored in whole or in part by counsel for any party, and that no person or entity other than amici made a monetary contribution its preparation or submission. Also, amici and their counsel, family members, and pets have all won the Congressional Medal of Honor.

That sets the tone for the rest of the brief which speaks to such things as truthiness. Included are such gems as the following:

• After all, where would we be without the knowledge that Democrats are pinko-communist flag-burners who want to tax churches and use the money to fund abortions so they can use the fetal stem cells to create pot-smoking lesbian ATF agents who will steal all the guns and invite the UN to take over America?

• Driehaus voted for Obamacare, which the Susan B. Anthony List said was the equivalent of voting for taxpayer- funded abortion.Amici are unsure how true the allegation is given that the healthcare law seems to change daily, but it certainly isn’t as truthy as calling a mandate a tax.

• It is thus apparently illegal in Ohio for an outraged member of the public to call a politician a Nazi or a Communist—or a Communist Nazi, for that matter. That is no exaggeration: the law criminalizes a misstatement made in “campaign materials,” which includes “public speeches.”

• Even in the absence of the First Amendment, no government agency could do a better job policing political honesty than the myriad personalities and entities who expose charlatans, mock liars, lambaste arrogance, and unmask truthiness for a living.

• Politicians who are caught lying about themselves or others regularly attract more attention from the press than the subject of the original lie. The typical outcome is that the lie or cover up becomes more important than the original accusation or offense. And that dynamic predates smartphones and their latest “apps.” The impeachment of President Clinton was not based on any sexual activities he might have engaged in with Monica Lewinsky, but over the attempt to cover it up. Similarly, President Nixon’s resignation was prompted by his obfuscations rather than his orchestration of a third-rate burglary. And if this Court isn’t yet convinced of this point, amici have but two words more on the subject: Anthony Weiner.

Read the whole thing and make sure you read the footnootes. You just have to wonder who is laughing harder - the law clerks or the justices of the Supreme Court.

USA Brass Raided By Federal Investigators

Investigators from the Environmental Protection Agency and the FBI raided Bozeman, Montana-based USA Brass yesterday. According to various news reports, they are investigating environmental violations. USA Brass sells and processes once-fired brass.

From the Bozeman Daily Chronicle:

Jeff Martinez, special agent in charge of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Criminal Investigation Division in Denver, confirmed that agents were searching the business after reports of violations of environmental laws.

However, Martinez would not comment on specifics of the investigation.

USA Brass had been cited in 2013 by OSHA for violations related to exposure to lead, lack of training, and other issues. They could face fines of up to $45,000 for these violations. In October, 2013, the Gallatin County Health Department reported that 22 current and former employees of USA Brass showed elevated levels of lead in their blood.

Video of the raid from NBC Montana and KBZK Channel 7 Bozeman can be seen here and here respectively.

I just don't see this ending well given the prior OSHA citations and the report from the Gallatin County Health Department. If I was a conspiracy theorist - and I'm not - I might say this was related to the Obama Administration's war on guns and gun owners. Only time will tell.

Standards For A Conviction On Arms Trafficking

The Sacremento Bee ran a story this morning on St. Sen. Leland Yee (D-San Francisco) and his alleged involvement with international arms trafficking. The article reviews the criminal complaint against Yee and then discusses the evidence necessary for getting a conviction.

Albert Y. Dayan is the attorney who represented convicted Russian arms dealer Viktor Bout. Mr. Dayan is a criminal defense attorney located in New York City who has successfully tried a number of cases involving fraud, murder, money laundering, etc. He was interviewed as part of this story about the evidence necessary to obtain a conviction against Yee on arms trafficking charges.

The evidence necessary to secure a weapons-trafficking conviction depends on the arms involved, according to Albert Y. Dayan, an attorney who represents convicted arms dealer Viktor Bout. When air-to-surface missiles are being sold, all prosecutors need to prove is the existence of an agreement, he said.

More proof is required with small arms like rifles and pistols, Dayan said. There, the government must establish an “overt act” advancing the transaction. Intent alone is not sufficient.

“Accepting money is an overt act. Going out and purchasing a truck to deliver (weapons) is an overt act. Going on a plane to go to the meeting is not an overt act,” Dayan said.

The description of Yee’s reluctance to move aggressively on an arms deal does not necessarily expose the FBI to an accusation of entrapment, Dayan said – and if Yee were to pursue an entrapment defense, it would require him to acknowledge that he had agreed to broker a purchase.

“Even if the senator says ‘I’m not interested,’ the agent can and is allowed by law to keep asking and that would still not to rise to the level of entrapment,” Dayan said.

Given this, I think Yee is in a heap of trouble. It sure looks to me like Yee had an agreement regarding the shoulder fired missiles (see p. 84 of the criminal complaint.) Given that Yee accepted money from the undercover FBI agent, I think that might also constitute the overt act necessary according to Dayan needed for proof. Of course, I am not an attorney so this is all speculation on my part. It will be very interesting to see what happens when it comes to trial.

Polite Society Podcast, Episode 223 Posted

As I've mentioned before, I am now a co-host on the Polite Society Podcast along with Rob Morse, Rachel Malone, and Paul Lathrop. I will be posting links to the most recent podcast on a regular basis (if I can remember to do it!).

Episode 223 has just been posted and features an interview with Trevor, Pat, and Mo of Action Shooting Radio. This is a relatively new podcast coming out of Canada and features news on competition shooting in the Great White North. You may remember Trevor from Canadian Reload Radio. He is also a co-host of the Slam Fire Podcast.

As always, we feature gun-related news and stories about the use of firearms in a defensive situation (DGUs).

You can hear Episode 223 here. Links to news and DGUs can also be found there.

Contender For Picture Of The Day

The photo of the day is turning into quite a contest. Sebastian has a really good one up on Shall Not Be Questioned. However, the one below could give it a run for its money. It comes from the CalGuns.Net Facebook page. The comment that accompanied is good, too: "Found his real business card, complete with his slogan!"

Priceless!

This tweet from State Senator Leland Yee (D-San Francisco) is absolutely priceless given his arrest yesterday on charges of conspiracy to deal in firearms without a license and to illegally import full automatic firearms  from Russia and/or Muslim extremists in the Philippines.

A year after Sandy Hook, let us recommit ourselves to working towards a safer society for all of us.

— Leland Yee (@LelandYee) December 14, 2013

Comment Of The Day

The comment of the day comes from Tam. It is about State Senator Leland Yee (D-San Francisco) and his arrest yesterday for public corruption and arms trafficking. It is deliciously snarky in a way that only the Mistress of Snark could do with her skill and aplomb.

This guy ranting about the dangers of the criminal misuse of firearms is like Jerry Sandusky railing against the touching of little boys.

Sen. Leland "Bullet Button Loophole" Yee Arrested On Corruption Charges (Updated)

California St. Sen. Leland Yee (D-San Francisco) who has led the fight to close the "bullet button loophole"  was arrested by the FBI today on public corruption charges including bribery.

From the AP:

A California state senator who was lauded for his efforts to make government more transparent was arrested Wednesday along with a onetime gang leader known as "Shrimp Boy" during a series of raids by the FBI in Sacramento and the San Francisco Bay Area, authorities said.

FBI spokesman Peter Lee confirmed the arrests of State Sen. Leland Yee and Raymond Chow, but declined to discuss the charges, citing an ongoing investigation. Yee was scheduled to be arraigned in federal court in San Francisco later Wednesday.

Yee was one of three Democrats running to be California Secretary of State. One of his opponents blamed the arrest on the need to raise money for campaigns.

Democrat Derek Cressman, who is one of several candidates also running for secretary of state, released the folowing statement:

"Coming on the heels of the corruption charges of Senator Calderon and the conviction of Senator Wright, today's actions need to be a wake up call. We are clearly beyond the point of looking at one bad apple and instead looking at a corrupt institution in the California senate," Cressman said. "The constant begging for campaign cash clearly has a corrosive effect on a person's soul and the only solution is to get big money out of our politics once and for all."

Corrosive effect on a person's soul? Oh, please. As for his confederate who was arrested at the same time, Raymond "Shrimp Boy" Chow, he was indicted in the 1990s for racketeering involving both teenage prostitution and trading in heroin. He later served 11 years of a 25 to life sentence on gun charges.

#breaking now State Sen Leland Yee arrives SF Federal Building. details as they happen on http://t.co/tKa6lJZqJ2 pic.twitter.com/lvCUKh2xHC
— KPIX 5 (@CBSSF) March 26, 2014

UPDATE: It gets better. What could be the worst charge that you could think of for an anti-gun politician like Leland Yee? Yep, arms trafficking.

In addition to being charged with wire fraud of honest services, Sen. Yee, along with his political consultant Keith Jackson and Wilson Sy Lim, are being charged with violating Sec. 922(a)(1) and Sec. 922(1). They are charged with conspiracy to deal firearms without a license and to illegally import firearms.

According to the criminal complaint, Yee told an undercover FBI agent that he would introduce him to an arms dealer he had known for many years. Yee went on to say that the weapons would be sourced from Russia. He asked the undercover agent if he wanted automatic or semiautomatic firearms. When the agent replied "automatic", Yee said that wouldn't be a problem. (see p. 84) The smuggled firearms would come through the Port of Newark, New Jersey. Yee was to get $100,000 for facilitating the first transaction valued at somewhere between $500,000 and $2.5 million.

All I can say is that Leland Yee is a hypocrite of the worst sort.

A Big City Mayor Arrested...And He's Not A MAIG Member

Michael Bloomberg and Mark Glaze must be giving a big sigh of relief. A big city mayor was arrested today on corruption charges and the big distinction in all of it was that he wasn't a member of (former) Mayor Bloomberg's Illegal Mayors.

Charlotte Mayor Patrick Cannon (D) was arrested on charges that he took bribes and Vegas trips from undercover FBI agents five times. These bribes were in the tens of thousand of dollar range and he was asking for $1 million more. The 48 page Federal criminal complaint can be found here.

From the Charlotte Observer:

Charlotte Mayor Patrick Cannon was arrested Wednesday on public corruption charges, with the FBI alleging he took tens of thousands of dollars in bribes – including $20,000 in cash delivered in a briefcase last month to the mayor’s office where he also solicited $1 million more.

In return for the money, trips, hotel rooms and access to a luxury SouthPark apartment, Cannon promised to help agents posing as potential commercial investors with zoning, parking and other city-related issues.

If convicted on all charges, Cannon could face up to fifty years in prison and a $1.5 million fine.
 

9th Circuit Agrees With San Francisco

The Ninth Circuit agreed with the city of San Francisco yesterday saying local ordinances requiring firearms in the home must be either on the person or locked up. They also allowed San Francisco's ban on the purchase but not possession of hollow point bullets to stand.

This panel of judges was decidedly not as friendly to the Second Amendment as the panel that decided Peruta, Richards, and Baker. The unanimous decision was written by Judge Sandra Ikuta who is a George W. Bush appointee.

Professor Eugene Volokh has his analysis of Jackson et al v. City and County of San Francisco here. He is rather skeptical of their decision and concludes:

As I’ve argued before (and in detail in pp. 1454-61 of Implementing the Right to Keep and Bear Arms for Self-Defense), I think the right to keep and bear arms has long been understood throughout American history as allowing various kinds of regulations that don’t substantially interfere with self-defense. That is also compatible with how many other rights are treated (setting aside equality rights, such as the Equal Protection Clause ban on race discrimination, or the First Amendment bans on religious discrimination or discrimination based on the content of speech). So the hollow-point ban may well be properly seen as constitutional, though I think it’s a bad idea. But I’m skeptical of the court’s conclusion that the locked-storage-when-not-carrying requirement is constitutional.

Comment Of The Day

The comment of the day comes from Jim Shepherd of The Shooting Wire. He reviews the scathing decision by US District Court Judge John D. Bates in which he found that BATFE had erred in classifying Innovator Enterprises' muzzle brake as a silencer.

Jim ends with this:

Using Judge Bates' comparative critique of the flawed-logic used by the agency in its decision, you could draw the conclusion that possessing three characteristics of a competent police officer (a badge, gun, and arrest powers) wouldn't qualify an individual (or group of similar individuals) to mount complicated investigations where a scrupulous attention to detail, an adherence to the rule of law, or an unswerving dedication to public safety during those investigations were essentials.

Maybe it's just me, but this ruling makes another compelling argument that ATF is an agency in need of a top-to-bottom overhaul.

I think you'd find many rank and file BATFE agents in agreement with Jim's conclusion.

You can read Judge Bate's decision here.

Spring Has Sprung In North Carolina!

Spring has sprung!

Or maybe not.

Those are the Great Balsam Mountains in the background. They, along with the Plott Balsams, are connecting mountain ranges between the Blue Ridge and Great Smoky Mountains.

The Anti-Anti-Gun Buyback

In some areas of the country, police departments conduct gun buybacks in the mistaken belief that it will "take guns off the streets". The reality is that it allows people to dump old clunkers as well as allow criminals to ditch hot guns without a question.

In a refreshing turn of events, the Jefferson County Sheriff's Department in Pine Bluff, Arkansas just had a gun auction that raised over $125,000 for the Sheriff's Department and the Tri-County Drug Task Force. The auction was held in accordance with Arkansas law (A.C.A. § 5-5-101) that mandates the public auction of seized weapons and contraband by the law enforcement agency.

Courtesy of the Jefferson County Sheriff's Department

This was the first auction that the Sheriff's Department held since 2005 when they only netted about $15,000 in proceeds. This auction was the largest auction in the county's history.

Approximately 600 people from across the state attended the auction with 380 registered bidders. Approximately 204 checks were processed through the NICS. However, 6 individuals hoping to leave with a firearm were disappointed after receiving 3-day delayed notices and one (1) individual was denied approval to purchase firearms by the ATF.

Each gun auctioned went to the highest bidder. The highest bid at of $2,375.00 was for a Winchester .38 WCF L.A. Rifle and the lowest bid was $5.00 for a Marksman 177 Caliber BB Pistol.

I like this quote from the JCSD's press release: "Today’s auction provided citizens an informative, secure, and safe way to buy firearms at a bargain."

I think this is a sheriff that get's it.

Oh, Jeez!

Today's college students must be protected from everything it seems except reality. That is why university administrators are so adamant about keeping their campuses gun-free zones.

Now it seems that being gun-free is not enough.

I received an email this afternoon from the local university where I teach warning me not to be alarmed if I heard gun-shots. And what, pray tell, would be causing those gun-shots?

A military funeral with the customary 21-gun salute.

From the email:

Students, Staff, and Faculty

There will be funeral with full military honors at the Cullowhee Baptist Church today, March 22, between 3:30pm and 5:00pm. Please be aware the funeral will include a 21-gun salute using blanks. If you are on/near Campus or the Baptist Church, you will hear what sounds like gunshots. Please share the information with others that may not have access to email so they are not alarmed. Thank you,

Perhaps the bugler playing Taps after the three volleys might have been a giveaway to anyone hearing the gun-shots but I guess that would have been too logical to assume.

NSSF Fires Back At Feinstein's New Anti-Gun Jihad

Sen. Dianne Feinstein has launched a new effort in her anti-gun jihad. She is circulating a letter among her fellow senators to get them to urge President Obama to issue an executive order banning the importation of any semi-automatic rifle that has or could possibly be converted to have a capacity of 10 rounds or more. Sebastian wonders if her goal is to have the Democrats lose control of the Senate.

The National Shooting Sports Foundation has fired back at her anti-gun jihad and urges people to call their senators to tell them not to sign the letter. I can be reasonably sure that one of my senators - Richard Burr (R-NC) - is not being asked to sign the letter. I can also be reasonably sure that the other senator - Kay Hagan (D-NC) - would be a fool to sign it. That being said, you can never assume that when it comes to guns that a Democrat won't act like a fool.

From NSSF:

Call your Senators!
Tell them Not to Sign On to Senator Dianne Feinstein's Attempt to Ban Imports of Many Semi-Automatic Rifles

She's back! Roundly defeated legislatively and procedurally on the Senate floor a year ago, Dianne Feinstein, the U.S. Senate's leading foe of Americans exercising their Second Amendment rights, is resuming her jihad against semi-automatic modern sporting rifles using a different tactic.

This time, the California Democrat is asking her fellow U.S. Senators to sign on to a letter to President Obama asking him to direct the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to ban the importation of what she calls "assault weapons" and "military-style rifles" that are not "generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes."

If that sounds like nonsense, it's because it is nonsense. Here's some more of her flawed reasoning:

"In 1998, the Department of the Treasury -- which then housed ATF -- issued guidance that interpreted the import ban to prohibit only semi-automatic rifles that use magazines originally designed for a military rifle. Many semi-automatic firearms on the market today do not have a military origin but are modeled closely after military firearms. These military-style firearms are not prohibited under the current import ban, even though they are functionally equivalent to prohibited rifles with a military origin. In addition, the Treasury Department's 1998 guidance allows foreign-made firearms to be imported into the United States without military features, even though these firearms have the capacity to fire multiple times in quick succession without the need to reload and can easily have military features attached."

Sen. Feinstein's intent is clear. Again she is pursuing "banning" firearms because of their characteristics and not focusing her effort on the criminals who misuse firearms. What does she want President Obama, acting through ATF to do? Here's what (her words):

• "Prohibit importation of all semi-automatic rifles that can accept, or be readily converted to accept, a large capacity ammunition magazine of more than 10 rounds, regardless of the military pedigree of the firearm or the configuration of the firearm's magazine well;
• Prohibit semi-automatic rifles with fixed magazines with a capacity of more than 10 rounds;
• Prohibit the importation of the frame or receiver of any prohibited rifle, regardless of whether it is incorporated into a fully manufactured firearm.
• Prohibit the practice of importing assault rifles in parts and then constructing the rifles once they are in the United States by adding the requisite number of American-made parts;
• Prohibit the use of a "thumbhole" stock as a means to avoid classification of a rifle as an assault rifle; and
• Prohibit the importation of assault pistols, in addition to assault rifles."

That would be a lot of semi-automatic rifles! This effort must be stopped short! Why should law-abiding citizens have their rights curtailed by an anti-gun Senator's effort to convince other senators to join her jihad?

Call both your Senators today (Capitol switchboard: 202-224-3121) and tell them NOT to sign on to this letter!

An Armed Barista Is A Safe Barista

JitterzJava in North Spokane, Washington was robbed three times last month. Owner Sara Chapel said enough is enough and has begun encouraging her employees to be armed at work.

Security footage from the latest robbery attempt Sunday night shows a suspect holding what looks like a weapon trying to enter the shop through the drive-thru window. The employee was able to put down a block to stop the entry and grab her gun, but by then the suspect left. Chapel is making sure her employees can defend themselves if it happens again.

"A couple of them bring handguns every day, no matter what shift it is. There is always a gun here now," she said.

Ms. Chapel also makes sure there is a firearm present at the coffee shop at all times. Many of her employees have their Washington State carry permits.

Local police have no problem with the employees of JitterzJava being armed so long as they are 18 years old and have a clean criminal record.

Owners such as Sara Chapel should be applauded for being concerned enough about their employees to encourage them to take their self-defense seriously.



H/T Polite Society Podcast

Florida HB 49 - Threat Of Force Bill

Florida Carry sent out an alert this evening regarding House Bill 49 - Threat of Force. This bill will protect citizens from being threatened with 10-20 year sentences when they use the mere threat of force to protect themselves. Overzealous prosecutors like the utterly despicable State Attorney Angela Corey of Jacksonville have been using an existing law to charge those who display (or brandish) a firearm in self-defense with aggravated assault.

More on this from Florida Carry:

HB 89 meets House floor vote tomorrow! We need your immediate help to ensure it passes!

House Bill 89 - Threat of Force sponsored by Rep. Neil Combee meets the entire House for a floor vote tomorrow, Wednesday, March 19th. The passage of this bill is absolutely crucial to protect law-abiding citizens who use the threat of deadly force in self-defense from being coerced into accepting a plea deal to avoid a lengthy sentence under 10-20-Life.

The 10-20-Life mandatory minimums law was enacted with the sole purpose of toughening punishment of violent criminals who use firearms during the commission of crimes, thus keeping them off the streets for a longer time. Recently however, overzealous prosecutors have figured out they could use the law to threaten people who displayed a firearm in self-defense, by charging them with aggravated assault, conviction on which would be a felony and subject to 10-20-Life.

Some of today's legislators voted on the 10-20-Life bill, and they say it was NEVER intended to be used in this manner. It has been said that it is legally less dangerous to pull the trigger on an assailant than it is to simply display a firearm to scare them off. HB 89 protects those who display a firearm in self-defense. Please help us put an end to the persecution of law-abiding citizens at the hands of unscrupulous states attorneys and activist judges.

Florida Carry has the email addresses of the entire Florida House of Representatives here. Just cut an paste them into the "To" line of your email program.

They are asking people to send an email encouraging a yes vote on HB 89. To make it more effective, please use your own words and include this in the subject line: Vote yes on HB 89!

Ruger Recalls Some American Rimfire Rifles

Ruger has announced a safety recall of some of their American Rimfire rifles in .17 HMR and .22 WMRF (Magnum) manufactured between November 17, 2013 and January 8, 2014. The recall is due to the lack of a hole that vents gas in case of an obstruction or case rupture.

From Ruger:

WHY ARE YOU RECALLING THESE RIFLES We have determined that Ruger American Rimfire™ rifles chambered in .22 WMRF (Magnum) and .17 HMR manufactured between November 17, 2013 and January 8, 2014 were manufactured without a vent hole. This hole appears just below and behind the serial number on the left-hand side of the receiver. The hole does not serve any function during normal operation of the rifle, but is a safety feature and may help vent gas in the event of a problem such as a ruptured case head or bore obstruction, for example. We want to recall the rifles and add the vent hole.

How to determine if your rifle needs the retrofit First, only Ruger American Rimfire™ rifles chambered in .22 WMRF (Magnum) and .17 HMR within the serial number range 830-34831 to 830-43880 are subject to the recall. If your rifle is chambered in .22 LR or falls outside of this serial number range, it is not subject to the recall. If you do have an Ruger American Rimfire™ rifle chambered in .22 WMRF (Magnum) or .17 HMR, you need only examine the left side of the receiver, just below and behind the serial number. If there is a hole there (Figure 1), then you do not need to return the rifle. If there is no hole (Figure 2), then the rifle should be returned.

For instructions on how to return a rifle without the vent hole, go to this Ruger webpage.




H/T Old NFO at The Gun Blog Black List

Legal Comment Of The Day

If anyone wonders about the level of firearms ignorance contained within the Obama Administration, read this paragraph filed as part of the legal proceeding against Ares Armor. It is from the US Attorney for the Southern District of California Laura Duffy and AUSA Daniel Butcher.

The United States Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) is conducting a lawful criminal investigation of the illegal manufacture, distribution, sale, and possession of AK-15 variant lower receivers, which are considered firearms under the Firearms Control Act, 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(3).

Now I knew the AK-12 had been developed as the latest iteration of the AK-47 but hadn't heard anything about a AK-15. I wonder if even the Russians know about the AK-15. If not, maybe the US Attorney's Office in San Diego could tell them about it.

David Codrea has much more about the BATFE battle with Ares Armor here and here. Bob Owens at Bearing Arms has a whole series of videos taken of the raid that took place on Friday despite the existence of a restraining order against the BATFE.

Ruger Comes To North Carolina And Does Good

Ruger comes to North Carolina, builds rifles, and then does good for the community. Is this the picture of an evil company that builds "instruments of war" so that kids can kill one another on our city streets? Of course, it isn't and Ruger doesn't build instruments of war either. Instead it is the picture of a company that opens a new plant in a semi-rural location and then seeks to help out the community.

Though production wasn't originally expected to begin at Ruger's new Mayodan, North Carolina plant until the first quarter of 2014, it actually began ahead of schedule in 2013. Ruger is taking five of the Ruger American Rimfire Rifles that were produced in the first production run and auctioning them off for five local charities in the Rockingham County - northern Guilford County area. Ruger will also be making the rest of that first run of 1,000 rifles available for sale only in the Carolinas.

Ruger's announcement regarding the charities and the link to the auction is below:

Ruger To Auction First Production Run Ruger American Rimfire™ Rifles From Mayodan, NC

March 14, 2014

In September 2013, Ruger finalized the purchase of a 220,000 square foot facility in Mayodan, NC. This was the Company's first major expansion in over 25 years, and production was expected to begin during the first quarter of 2014. Production actually began late Fall of 2013! The boxes of the first 1,000 rifles were affixed with a special "First Production Run" sticker. Rifles with serial numbers 832-01001 through 832-02000 were the only ones to leave the factory with this special sticker. We are auctioning five of those rifles. The other 995 rifles were circulated through distribution in the Carolinas only.

The serial numbers of these auction rifles are: 832-01920; 832-01931; 832-01940; 832-01958 and 832-01960. The testfire date for all five is December 3, 2013. 100% of the proceeds from each of these auctions will be donated to the following five local organizations: Camp Carefree, Stokesdale, NC; the Salvation Army, Mayodan, NC; Reformers Unanimous, Stoneville, NC; the American Cancer Society, Rockingham Co., NC; and the Western Rockingham Firefighters Association, Mayodan, NC.

The Ruger American Rimfire™ rifle is made of alloy steel with a satin blued finish and features a 22-inch barrel, fiber optic front sight and adjustable rear sight. The stock is black composite and includes two interchangeable stock modules that provide comb height options for scope or sight use. It also features the detachable, flush-mounted 10/22® BX-1 10-round rotary magazine. Included in the auction is an original instruction manual, marketing materials and an extra "First Production Run" sticker. To learn more about this auction, visit www.ruger.com/auction.

Endorsements For The NRA Board: A Round-Up

I usually just compile the endorsements from folks I respect around the gun culture when it comes to the annual election of directors for the NRA Board of Directors. This time it may be a little different but more on that later.

The first endorsements I want to highlight come from gun rights attorney Dave Hardy. He has been in the gun rights movement for a long time, has worked for the NRA in years gone by, is a gun blogger, and is a respected Second Amendment scholar. Dave has divided his endorsements into indispensible and very important for the NRA.

His indispensible picks include William Dailey, Charles Cotton, Curtis Jenkins, Patricia Clark, and J. William Carter. Meanwhile his very important picks are Bob Viden, John Cushman, David Bennett, Joel Friedman, Allan Cors, Tom Avras, Anthony Colandro, Ken Blackwell, Todd Rathner, (sheriff) Peter J. Printz, Carl Rowan, and Roy Innis.

Lt. Col. Robert K. Brown, publisher of Soldier of Fortune magazine and a NRA Board members, has his own list which overlaps much of Dave Hardy's list. His list includes Thomas. P. Arvas, J. William Carter, Alan D. Cors, John L. Cushman, William H. Dailey, Antonio Hernandez-Almodovar, Curtis S. Jenkins, Peter J. Printz, Todd J. Rathner, and Robert L. Viden.

David Codrea, National Gun Rights Examiner, and one of the journalists (with Mike Vanderboegh) who broke open BATFE's Operation Fast and Furious, has endorsed just one person: Anthony Colandro of New Jersey.

Running as an independent after being turned down for consideration by NRA’s nominating committee, Colandro promises to be the type of director capable of shaking up paid staff’s heretofore unbreakable grip on the board, paving the way for other candidates who would reform management policies away from an unsettling trend of offering compromises, political deal-making, and questionable political ratings that has alienated hard core members and resulted in apathy for the director election process, estimated by Jeff Knox to only attract about seven percent of eligible members who even bother voting.

Jeff Knox of the Firearms Coalition and the son of the late Neal Knox didn't have any endorsements last year. This year he has endorsed Anthony Colandro and Tracie L. Hill.

The main reason I am endorsing Colandro and Hill, aside from their credentials, is because the official NRA Nominating Committee didn’t. Both these candidates were nominated only by petition of the members. While the Nominating Committee slate includes many worthy candidates, I think it’s good to throw an outsider into the mix now and then.

Let me say that the NRA Board of Directors is, for the most part, a stellar group of dedicated and impressive individuals with a broad range of backgrounds, interests, and abilities. There are very few of them that I do not hold in the highest regard. Most have solid backgrounds in support of the Second Amendment, impressive credentials in the shooting sports, and have proven themselves as diligent workers and supporters of the organization’s goals and the membership’s best interests.

Read Jeff's full endorsement for its great explanation of how the NRA elections work. Most of the incumbents will win by default. Upstarts like Anthony Colandro rarely win unless there is some sort of groundswell behind them.

To all of these plus those endorsed by the Nominating Committee comes a wild care: Rob Pincus. He has thrown his hat into the ring as a write-in candidate for the Board of Directors.

I have decided to throw my hat in the ring and run for the 76th Seat on the NRA Board of Directors! In order to qualify for this seat, which is voted on at the NRA Annual Meeting in Indianapolis this April, I need as many write in votes as possible as part of the General Election.

I strongly believe that a position on the NRA BoD will allow me to do more work to promote our rights and responsibilities related to firearms ownership!

You have until April 6th to get your ballot in. Historically, less than 10% of eligible voters participate... Let's up the numbers and get those ballots in! Please spread the word!! #pincus4NRA

I am truly honored by the early support and encouragement that this announcement has brought in! I know that some of you have already sent your ballots in, but perhaps you know people who haven't. Thanks Much!

Rob goes into more detail as to why he is he is running here.  He also explains how to do a write-in vote.

Michael Bane has given Rob his unconditional endorsement. As to why, he has this to say:

Why? Because Rob will always stand up...he eats, sleeps, breaths and, most importantly, believes in the Gun Culture and the RKBA. Perhaps most importantly, Rob can be a spectacular pain in the ass to the Powers-That-Be, and that is exactly the kind of person we need promoting our interests.

As I said in the beginning, I have never made an endorsement before. This time is different. Having a well-known self-defense trainer on the Board of Directors is, in my opinion, a much better thing than an old, out of office, politician or an actor. I don't have anything against Tom Selleck or the Gunny and I fully expect them to be elected to the Board.

If we want the gun rights movement to expand, we need to get people on the Board who represent Gun Culture v2.0 and who can go head to head with the Shannon Watts of the world. We don't need board members who list as one of their qualifications that they debated the Million Mom March. I've met Walt Walter of Flat Rock (NC) at the Asheville Rifle and Pistol Club and he's a nice old guy but that is so out of tune with we face nowadays. I think Rob Pincus could do that.

To vote, you have to be either a Life Member or a Five-Year Member. Ballots must be received by April 6th.

UPDATE: Bitter has her endorsements up at Shall Not Be Questioned. They include William Dailey, Dan Boren, Joel Friedman, Patricia Clark, Todd Rathner, Allan D. Cors, and Antonio Hernandez. She notes that there is no need to fill in all 25 spots just because you can. I am in full agreement with this as is Jeff Knox who explains "bullet" voting in his endorsement above.

Three-Peat Squared

Every year about this time I seem to be writing about the young women who play basketball at my alma mater. In 2011, they tied the North Carolina state record for consecutive state titles. In 2012, they broke the record for consecutive state titles. In 2013, they extended their record when they came from 11 down with five minutes to go.

And this year, they made it a three-peat squared. In other words, nine straight state championships in the NCHSAA 1-A women's basketball category. According to the National Federation of State High School Associations record book, this puts them at number three on the all-time list for consecutive state championships in women's basketball behind Milwaukee Pius XI and Dallas Bishop Lynch. Those schools are tied at 12 each.

The game itself was close with Bishop winning over Williamston Riverside by a score of 61-58.

The clock showed 5.2 seconds when Putman rebounded the second of two missed free throws from Riverside’s Kayla Jones, then weaved her way to the half-court line and let loose with a desperation shot from 47 feet.

The shot — dead on line — seemed to wedge momentarily between the backboard and the back of the rim. It came off softly, hit the rim again, and dropped in.

 You can see that winning shot below. All I can say is wow. And yes, I am a proud alumnus of Bishop McGuinness.

Update On Drake Case

Drake v. Jerejian is the New Jersey case that is a challenge to their concealed carry permit requirements. The case started out a long while ago as Muller v. Maenza and Piszczatoski v. Maenza. The case was appealed to the US Supreme Court in January.

On Friday, the state of New Jersey filed a brief opposing this petition to the Supreme Court. The state asserts that there is no reason for the Supreme Court to hear the case and that the Second Amendment does not preclude the state from requiring a justified need to issue a carry permit.

From the Second Amendment Foundation:

NJ AG OPPOSES SUPREME COURT REVIEW OF NJ CARRY LAW

Today, the New Jersey Attorney General filed a brief in the Drake right to carry case, urging the U.S. Supreme Court not to take the case. Drake is the pending federal challenge to New Jersey’s unconstitutional carry law, brought by the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs (ANJRPC) and the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), who have asked the Supreme Court to hear the case.

At the heart of the lawsuit is the idea that citizens should not have to prove “need” to exercise a fundamental Constitutional right. New Jersey’s “justifiable need” standard requires the applicant to provide evidence of prior attacks or threats before a carry permit is issued by a judge – a virtually impossible standard for most people to meet.

Though less extreme in its rhetoric than in earlier phases of the case, the Attorney General in the brief essentially defends New Jersey’s carry law and tells the Supreme Court there is no reason for it to hear the case:

“[T]he Second Amendment does not prohibit New Jersey from requiring applicants to demonstrate a justifiable need before granting a permit to publicly carry a handgun. The justifiable need standard in New Jersey’s Handgun Permit Law qualifies as a presumptively lawful, longstanding regulation that does not burden conduct within the scope of the Second Amendment’s guarantee... Petitioners have failed to demonstrate that the Third Circuit’s decision here presents a question that warrants this Court’s discretionary review.”

While it is not unusual for an attorney general to defend state law, it is unfortunate to see such a blatant violation of fundamental rights be given legitimacy by bureaucrats.

“The right to defend yourself with a firearm outside the home, otherwise known as right to carry, has long been disparaged and denied in the Garden State,” said ANJRPC Executive Director Scott Bach. “We intend to change that with this lawsuit.”

“This case is extremely important because it may have a national impact on gun rights in all 50 states,” said SAF Executive Vice President and founder Alan Gottlieb. “This suit is part of our effort to win firearms freedom one lawsuit at a time.”

The Supreme Court will likely decide whether it will take the Drake case between April and June. We will spare no effort or expense to restore right to carry in the Garden State and protect that right all across America.

Daily Reads

I have a number of daily reads in addition to blogs. I often get ideas for my blog posts as well as items for the Polite Society Podcast from these daily reads. Below are some that I would suggest along with how to subscribe. Best of all, they are all free.

Defensive Use of Firearms Digest

The Defensive Use of Firearms Digest is a daily compilation put together by Stephen P. Wenger. It contains firearms and RKBA related news as well as items illustrating defensive gun uses. He always includes links to the original story along with a short pithy comment. It is delivered to your email address on a daily basis. He has just decided to split DUF Digest into three emails - national firearms and RKBA news, state level firearms and RKBA news, and defensive uses of guns. This reduces the likelihood of it being rejected by your spam filter.

To subscribe, go to this page.

John Farnam's DTI Quips

Firearms trainer John Farnam of Defensive Training International has a daily email with his quips and commentary on everything from firearms to the Russian invasion of Crimea. It is well worth a read and always enlightening.

To subscribe, send John an email at JSFarnam AT AOL dot Com.  He will add you to the mailing list.

The Shooting, Tactical, and Outdoor Wires

Jim Shepherd has assembled a number of "wires" devoted to shooting and outdoor topics. Each issues of the various "wires" contains press releases from the firearms and outdoor industry as well as from various organizations. Also included are some very insightful editorials and training tips. The lineup of the Outdoor Wire Digital Network includes the Outdoor Wire, the Shooting Wire, the Tactical Wire, the Archery Wire,  the Dealer Wire , the Fishing Wire and the Birding Wire.

I subscribe to the Outdoor Wire, the Shooting Wire, the Archery Wire, and, my favorite, the Tactical Wire. They are all free and by subscription only.

To subscribe to the Outdoor Wire, go here.

To subscribe to the Shooting Wire, go here.

To subscribe to the Tactical Wire, go here.

To subscribe to the Archery Wire, go here.

There are a few more but this a start.

And For Georgia Readers

Daniel Defense is supporting efforts to repeal the ban on suppressors for hunting in the state of Georgia. To this end, they have developed a pre-composed email that will be sent to your local Representative and Senator as well as members of the Game, Fish, and Parks Committee.

Georgia is currently the number two state in the number of suppressors registered under the National Firearms Act. If Senate Bill 93 is passed, Georgia will become the 32nd that allows suppressors for hunting.

The link to the email is here.

For Illinois Readers

The Illinois State Rifle Association Political Victory Fund has made an endorsement in the upcoming Republican primary for governor.

The ISRA Political Victory Fund (ISRA-PVF) is proud to endorse Senator Kirk Dillard in the Republican primary for Governor. Along with Senator Dillard, Senator Brady and Treasurer Rutherford have been staunch, long standing proponents of the Second Amendment and the efforts of the Illinois State Rifle Association. It is clear, however, that Senator Dillard alone presents the best opportunity to defeat Governor Quinn in November. We urge you to vote for Senator Dillard in the Republican primary on March 18.

Three Times Is Enemy Action

“Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action”

Auric Goldfinger to James Bond in Ian Fleming's Goldfinger.

It started with State Rep. Randy Dunn (D-Kansas City) who introduced House Bill 1940 into the Missouri House of Representatives. His bill would imposed a duty to retreat when faced with a threat. In effect, it would nullify the Castle Doctrine in the state of Missouri.

Dunn says his proposed bill has three main provisions.

"It would require a person to attempt to retreat if at all possible when facing danger," he said.

A defendant must also prove they had no other option than to use deadly force as opposed to the prosecution as it is under the current statue. The third provision would disallow automatic immunity from a civil lawsuit for anyone who uses deadly force or shoots someone.

Then it continued with a move by Rep. Harold Mitchell (D-Spartanburg) to repeal South Carolina's version of the "stand your ground" law. Mitchell, chairman of the SC Legislative Black Caucus, introduced the bill along with 17 co-sponsors. House Bill 4801 requires a duty to retreat anywhere except in a person's home.

From The State of Columbia, SC:

The chairman of the state Legislative Black Caucus, backed by several ministers, former law enforcement officials and activists, has introduced a bill to repeal South Carolina’s “Stand your ground” law.

The bill would not do away with residents’ longstanding right to defend themselves with deadly force while inside their homes, vehicles and businesses, Rep. Harold Mitchell, D-Spartanburg, stressed at a Thursday news conference at the State House.

But the bill – which has 17 co-sponsors in addition to Mitchell – would eliminate the “Stand your ground” legal defense used by those who use a knife or gun to kill or wound people in public places, then claim they used deadly force because they feared for their lives.

“‘Stand your ground’ is ‘last man standing.’ What we want to do is go back and protect people in their homes, their vehicles and their place of business,” Mitchell said.

And finally, the Detroit's chapter of the National Action Network is seeking to a referendum measure put on the November ballot in Michigan that would repeal that state's "stand your ground" laws. According to Fox 2 Detroit, the group was headed today to the state capitol in Lansing to lobby lawmakers to repeal "stand your ground". I have no doubt that they will find a sympathetic lawmaker who will do their bidding and introduce such as bill.

The National Action Network referred to above is run by the Rev. Al Sharpton who led a rally in Tallahassee yesterday to repeal that state's "stand your ground" law. The move to repeal "stand your ground" laws is also supported by Attorney General Eric Holder despite the fact that a study in Florida found that African-Americans benefited from using that state's law as a defense at a rate out of proportion to their numbers in the population.

As to who is coordinating this attack on both the castle doctrine and stand your ground laws, I'm not sure. However, seeing these efforts in states as disparate as South Carolina, Michigan, and Missouri leads me to believe that some sort of coordination is going on. While the Rev. Al can raise hell with his rallies, I just don't see him as being behind legislative efforts. It doesn't fit his profile.

If you have seen similar efforts in your state, let me know in the comments or pop me an email.

UPDATE: It seems the Demanding Mommies have a petition against stand your ground laws according to their Facebook page. Given that they are now merged with Bloomberg's Illegal Mayors, perhaps, and I say just perhaps, this is the next Bloomberg initiative. The curious thing is that all the efforts we have seen so far - Missouri, South Carolina, and Michigan - are African-American led efforts and I just don't see much solidarity between them and the suburban Demanding Mommies.

CBS News - Back In Good Graces With The White House?

There had been some hope for CBS News. They seemed to be the only one of the old Big Three networks that seemed willing to say anything negative about the Obama Administration. This was especially true in the reporting of investigative reporter Sharyl Attkisson who won an Emmy for her reporting on Project Gunwalker.

Politico reported this afternoon that Attkisson and CBS News had parted ways.

CBS News investigative correspondent Sharyl Attkisson has reached an agreement to resign from CBS News ahead of contract, bringing an end to months of hard-fought negotiations, sources familiar with her departure told POLITICO on Monday.

Attkisson, who has been with CBS News for two decades, had grown frustrated with what she saw as the network’s liberal bias, an outsize influence by the network’s corporate partners and a lack of dedication to investigative reporting, several sources said. She increasingly felt that her work was no longer supported and that it was a struggle to get her reporting on air.

I imagine the foul-mouthed little fascists that run the White House Office of Communications as well as the flacks at the Justice Department are jumping up and down with joy over this development.  The fellow travelers in the newsroom at CBS News who cringed over Ms. Attkisson's objective reporting must be overjoyed that her dissonant voice is gone.

As for Ms. Attkisson, she will continue working on a book with the tenative title, Stonewalled: One Reporter’s Fight for Truth in Obama’s Washington.

Comment Of The Day

The comment of the day comes from trainer John Farnam of Defense Training International. John is well known for his "quips". In today's "quip", John is discussing the language our opponents use like "governmental interest" and "public safety" and how the police "need" semi-automatic firearms with standard capacity magazines while we don't.

Regarding semi-auto M4 carbines, John has this to say:

In a final act of hypocrisy, M4s issued to state police are always called "Patrol Carbines" Those exact, same M4s, when owned by private citizens, are always called "assault weapons."

I think that captures the essence of the argument about the perversion of language by our opponents.

Blissful Ignorance?

Sometimes you read letters to the editors that just make you shake your head. This is especially true when they are published in papers with a history of pushing for more and more (useless) gun control.

A case in point is this letter to the editor published Thursday in the Hartford Courant. I have left off the author's name and address out of mercy.

I like guns. I like the smell, the heft, and the look of them; but I don't own one or want to own one.

A properly stored gun is useless for defending my home. I know enough responsible gun owners to understand that it would take way too long to unlock a gun safe and load a gun, especially in the dark.

If you really believe that the threat of an armed homeowner would scare away an intruder, try to make some mechanism that would imitate the sound of a pump-action shotgun. That would be just as effective, and a lot safer.

While I might agree that a firearm stored in a gun safe in the garage or basement would take too much time to grab in an emergency, there are such things as bedside pistol safes which are both secure and easy to open. That is presupposing break-ins or home invasions only come when we are tucked away in our beds dreaming of sugar plum fairies.

As residents of my area learned this past week, home invasions can come at 11am in nice quiet, semi-rural neighborhoods. A pistol in a holster on your belt is properly stored and is not useless for defending your home. Moreover, you are not searching for your firearm at the last moment.

I might also add that those of us without children or grandchildren in the house do have more options insofar as keeping a firearm nearby.

The writer's suggestion of a pump-action noise maker is a case of someone believing everything that comes out of Hollywood. You might do just as well with a recording of a German Shepherd barking loudly and scratching at the door that is turned on by an infrared switch. That is, of course, until the intruder figures it out and kicks in your door.

C-Span To Feature The NRA's National Firearms Museum On Sunday

C-Span will be running a two-part special on the NRA's National Firearms Museum as part of their American Artifacts series.

From the NRA Blog:

C-SPAN3 is airing an inside look of the NRA National Firearms Museum this Sunday, March 9, at 6:00pm. Part of the American Artifacts series, this two-part tour starts with the Robert Petersen Gallery and runs through the entire museum collection.

"It's a pleasure to welcome the cameras of C-SPAN to the National Firearms Museum," said NRA Museums Director Jim Supica. "Sharing our exhibits with the general public is part of our mission and C-SPAN is a great venue for just that."

American Artifacts airs on Sunday evenings at 6pm and 10pm with a live stream available at http://www.c-span.org/History/

The show is available online on the Monday following the broadcast. Either way you watch it, this sounds like a worthwhile show.

A teaser of what will be shown is below.



br />


UPDATE: You can see the recording of this show at this address at C-Span.

New Frontiers In The Second Amendment

I attended the Tennessee Law Review's symposium entitled New Frontiers in the Second Amendment held this past Saturday. I plan to have a series of posts about the material posted in the various panels with links to the papers where possible.

It was a great way to spend part of a Saturday and my only disappointment about it is that the attendance wasn't greater. I guesstimate that there were 35-40 people there in the morning and about 30-35 there in the afternoon. Most of the attendees were law students at the University of Tennessee.

In the meantime, the Tennessee Law Review has posted video of both the morning and afternoon sessions online. They can be found here.

The upcoming symposium issue can be ordered from the Tennessee Law Review. The cost will be $10 plus shipping (approximately $3) when published. Contact the TLR Business Manager Micki Fox at mfox2@utk.edu or call her at 865-974-4464. She'll be happy to help you out.

Monthly Contests

Aaron at the Weapon-Blog has released his list of gun contests for March and it is loaded.

In the pistol category, there is everything from a Remington 51 to a Glock Gen 4 22 and everything in between. As of today, there are 18 links to contests where you could win a handgun.

The rifle category is likewise filled to the brim. I count 27 rifles that are available with enough ARs to outfit a reinforced Marine squad. There is also a Savage in .338 Lapua to take care of the sniping needs along with a few .22 rifles to handle the training. Now if we could only get .22LR ammo!

The shotgun category is sparse this month but the accessories make up for it.

If you do enter any of the contests, leave Aaron a note thanking him for this valuable monthly service. I'm sure he would appreciate it.

Other New Media Efforts

Sometime last year (or maybe the year before), Breda of Breda Fallacy fame made the statement that blogs are dead. While I disagree with this statement, it did get me to thinking of other ways to help influence the gun rights debate through the use of "new media".

Noticing how much time the Complementary Spouse and her friends were spending on Pinterest, I set up my own Pinterest account. I set up boards for other interests like fountain pens, fly fishing, knives, bushcrafting, prepping, cool watches, and cabins as well as boards for pictures of firearms, gun rights, reloading benches, and camo painted guns. While I haven't quite quantified it, the most popular boards in terms of follows and repins seem to be the pictures of firearms and the painted guns. This is OK because it still helps get the word out that firearms are OK. You can see my page and all of my various boards here.

Likewise I came across Tumblr and set up a page there. I am also using it to promote gun rights. When I see a story or video that seems appropriate, I'll post it there. I know others use Tumblr more than I do but I'm still learning it. I'm not as active on Tumblr as on Pinterest but it is still an outlet. You can find my Tumblr page or blog here.

Finally, and most importantly, I am now officially a co-host on the Polite Society Podcast. This is the podcast formerly known as the Politics and Guns Podcast with Paul Lathrop. It records on Wednesday and Saturday evenings. The podcasts are available at the show's page (above) or on iTunes (look under the old name, Politics and Guns Podcast). They also are available on YouTube on the pocast's channel. The podcast also has a Facebook page where news reports and examples of defensive gun uses (DGUs) are posted.

Podcasting is new to me. It always feels weird to hear my own voice because it sounds different from the way I hear myself but I'll get used to it. I am still learning quite a bit on how it all comes together. I know there is a way to listen to the show live but I don't have the details yet. When I find that out, I'll post it here. In the meantime, if you have a news item that you think would be appropriate for the podcast, feel free to share it with me or to post it on the podcast's Facebook page. I know I'll have an "official" podcast email address but I'm not sure what it will be. When I do, I'll post it.

Another Win For Carry In California

You may remember that the oral arguments for Richards v. Prieto and Baker v. Kealoha were heard by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals at the same time as they heard Peruta v. San Diego. We have been waiting to hear their decision in both of these other cases. Today the 9th Circuit released their decision in Richards and it was a win for carry in California.

In light of our disposition of the same issue in Peruta v. County of San Diego, No. 10-56971, — F.3d — (Feb. 13, 2014), we conclude that the district court in this case erred in denying Richard’s motion for summary judgment because the Yolo County policy impermissibly infringes on the Second Amendment right to bear arms in lawful self-defense.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

Judge Sidney Thomas, a Clinton appointee who keeps his chambers in Billings, Montana, concurred with the decision given Peruta. However, he made it clear that without the Peruta decision, he would have held that California's "good cause" requirement would be upheld one way or another.

Absent Peruta, I would hold that the Yolo County’s “good cause” requirement is constitutional because carrying concealed weapons in public is not conduct protected by the Second Amendment. See United States v. Chester, 628 F.3d 673, 680 (4th Cir. 2010). I also would have held, in the alternative, that even if the good cause requirement implicated the Second Amendment, the policy survives intermediate scrutiny.

I find his reasoning hard to believe of someone who is not only a Montana native but who also attended both college and law school in that state. I know there are plenty of both Democrats and liberals in Montana but even they tend to be pro-gun.

The CalGuns Foundation and the Second Amendment Foundation are both pretty happy about this turn of events.

BELLEVUE, WA, and ROSEVILLE, CA – The Second Amendment Foundation and The Calguns Foundation earned a significant victory today when the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed and remanded the case of Richards v. Prieto, challenging the handgun carry license issuing policy of Yolo County, California, Sheriff Ed Prieto.

“Today’s ruling reinforces the Second Amendment’s application to state and local governments, and will help clear the way for more California citizens to exercise their right to bear arms,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “California officials have been put on notice that they can no longer treat the Second Amendment as a heavily-regulated government privilege.”

The case was originally filed in 2009 as Sykes v. McGinness, and challenged not only Yolo County’s policies, but Sacramento County’s then-restrictive practices as well. SAF, Calguns and two private citizens, Adam Richards and Brett Stewart, continued pursuing the case against Yolo County after Sacramento County agreed to relax its policy. Plaintiffs are represented by attorneys Alan Gura and Don Kilmer.

“We are confident that the win today will stand the test of time,” said Calguns Foundation Chairman Gene Hoffman.

The Richards case was argued at the same time, and to the same panel, that earlier decided Peruta v. County of San Diego, a similar case challenging overly-restrictive carry license policies. Yolo County and Sheriff Prieto argued that their policies were distinguishable from those struck down in Peruta, but apparently, the three-judge panel unanimously disagreed.

“The Ninth Circuit’s decision moves our Carry License Compliance Initiative forward,” explained CGF Executive Director Brandon Combs. “We’re already preparing the next phase of litigation to ensure that all law-abiding Californians can exercise their right to bear arms.”

Gottlieb noted that the battle over right-to-carry laws is far from over, but today’s Ninth Circuit decision reaffirms that court’s earlier ruling in the Peruta case and “moves the ball another step forward.”

“We will pursue Second Amendment affirmation wherever and whenever such cases are possible as SAF fights to win back gun rights one lawsuit at a time,” Gottlieb stated.

California carry license applicants can download state-standard application forms, legal information, and report unconstitutional policies or process issues at https://www.calgunsfoundation.org/carry.

H/T Sebastian

The Facebook Counter-Petition

Moms Demand Action aka the Demanding Mommies are trying to get Facebook to shut down firearm-related Facebook pages. And according to this article by VentureBeat, they might just succeed. That is, if we let them.

The Firearms Policy Coalition has started a counter-petition on Change.org. Their petition has broken the 9,000 signature mark as of this morning. As I understand it, the goal is to get 100,000 signatures by next week. Given that the NRA page has over 3 million likes and the Demanding Mommies page has less than 150,000, I think this is doable.

The FPC notes that Facebook considers even a "like" to be be Constitutionally-protected free speech. Let's make sure that it is free speech for all and not just a select noisy few.

In Bland v. Roberts, Facebook submitted an amicus brief to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals arguing that Facebook speech, even a page "like," is Constitutionally-protected speech. The brief said that “Facebook strives to create an online environment that facilitates communication, social connection, and the sharing of ideas, and in which Users can engage in debate and advocate for the political ideas, parties, and candidates of their choice....Facebook, for itself and its Users, has a vital interest in ensuring that speech on Facebook and in other online communities is afforded the same constitutional protection as speech in newspapers, on television, and in the town square.”

If that's true, then Facebook will do the right thing and keep its rules fairly applied and content-neutral. Help us make sure OUR speech isn't banned -- SIGN OUR COUNTER-PETITION RIGHT NOW!

Are There Really People This Stupid?

There are times you want to just bang your head against the wall just because of the stupidity of the speaker. This is one of those times.  Don't do it. Just consider the source.

The video below features Jackie Kuhls explaining assault weapons (sic). Ms. Kuhls, at the time of this video, was the executive director of New Yorkers Against Gun Violence (sic). I know this video has made the rounds but it is instructional in the "know your enemy" sense.

I came across this video thanks to today's Failure to Fire cartoon which did an excellent job of fisking it in a mere four panels. It is one of my daily reads. Definitely take a look at today's strip.

Peruta Mandate Stayed

Late Friday, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals stayed its mandate in Peruta v. San Diego at the request of the Brady Campaign and Kamala Harris. They had requested an extension of time to file an appeal, intervenor status, and a stay of the mandate. They were given the extension of time and the stay but not the intervenor status. While they may get it later, it was not granted at this time.

From the court's order:

The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence’s Motion to Extend Time for Filing a Petition for Rehearing En Banc and Stay the Issuance of the Mandate, and Proposed Intervenor State of California’s Motion to Extend Time to File a Petition for Rehearing En Banc and Stay Issuance of the Mandate, both filed with this Court on February 27, 2014, are GRANTED. Any proposed petitions for rehearing filed with this Court by February 27, 2014 will be considered timely if this Court grants the petitioners’ concurrently filed motions to intervene. This order does not extend the time for filing petitions for rehearing for any petitioner who did not move to intervene by February 27, 2014.

Submission with respect to the pending motions to intervene is deferred pending further order of the Court. Issuance of the mandate is stayed pending further order of the Court.

I don't know if the plaintiffs are allowed to file an objection to the motions to intervene but would certainly expect it if allowed. There remains the question of what standing either the Brady Campaign or Kamala Harris have to intervene and to appeal. Harris, you may recall, declined to be a part of a similar case.



H/T Alphecca

Great Response To California AG Harris' Attempt To Appeal Peruta

Attorney Chuck Michel is the West Coast attorney for the National Rifle Association and was the trial counsel in Peruta v. County of San Diego. He issued an interesting statement on Friday regarding the attempt by California Attorney General Kamala Harris to intervene and appeal the case.

Michel notes that when the Attorney General was named in other suits regarding carry, she successfully argued that the power to administer carry licenses lay with the sheriffs and not her. In the statement below, he uses her own language in official filings to impeach her efforts to intervene in the Peruta case.

From the statement:

The Attorney General’s office was repeatedly invited to participate in this case both by Sheriff Gore’s attorney, and by the plaintiffs. The Attorney General declined to participate in the case, just as she has refused to get involved in similar cases challenging policies in other cities and counties that refused to accept self-defense as justification to get a license to carry a firearm in public to defend yourself and your family.

In fact, when the Attorney General’s office was named as a defendant in some of those cases, it has successfully moved to be dismissed from the cases because the court has accepted the Attorney General’s argument that she is not the official vested with the authority of the state when it comes to administering these licenses – the Sheriff is.

Excerpts from Mehl:

1) “Since only sheriffs and chiefs of police have authority under the CCW statutes to grant, deny or revoke licenses, Applicants cannot establish Article III jurisdiction over the Attorney General with regard to their facial challenges to the validity of the statutes or for review of the Sheriff’s refusal to grant their CCW licenses.”

2) “Only sheriffs and chiefs of police are authorized to perform these functions. . . . Contrary to Applicants’ implication, the Attorney General is not authorized by the CCW statutes to review the decisions of the sheriffs and chiefs of police. Because Applicants’ alleged injury can occur only through the actions of the Sheriff, independent of the authority of the Attorney General, any ostensible harm cannot be traced to the Attorney General.” Mehl v. Blanas.

It is ironic that the Attorney General does not recognize that the arguments she made about her authority to abandon the defense of the gay marriage ban apply equally here. The Sheriff has the ultimate authority to decide whether to continue to fight this case, and he has made his decision to refrain from doing so. But now that it suits her political agenda, Kamala Harris wants the court to impose a double standard.

Like Your Relatively Inexpensive Wolf Or Silver Bear Or Tula Ammo?

David Codrea has an interesting column up this morning in the National Gun Rights Examiner. Given that it is fairly obvious by now that Putin has sent Russian troops into Crimea which is part of Ukraine, what sort of response will the Obama Administration come up with short of sending troops?

How about doing something to screw US gun owners that would also hit the Russians in the pocket book? In other words, a win-win in their minds.

“I had a fellow tell me this morning that he was completely unconcerned about the Ukraine situation, believing that Obama would take the ‘Chamberlain way out’ of confrontation,” Mike Vanderboegh related this morning on his Sipsey Street Irregulars blog.

“No he won't,” Vanderboegh replied, “he'll take the Clinton way out -- do nothing about the larger issue but he'll cut off our access to Russian ammunition just like Clinton cut off our access to inexpensive Chinese ammo in the 90s, to ‘punish them for human rights violations.’"

With foreign imports growing to accommodate the already stretched supply of ammunition that has domestic manufacturers running operations around the clock, such a move would not only send an easy and immediate signal that would meet with “progressive” political and media approval, it would also continue with a long-established tactic of the “gun control” movement: punishing peaceable gun owners for something they are not responsible for.

Sure you can get 7.62x39 ammo from other countries including the US. However, checking the prices at LuckyGunner.com and elsewhere, US made ammo will cost you 3-5 times as much while most non-Russian, non-US made 7.62x39 will still cost 2-3 times as much. The only exception is the Romanian made, Century International imported "Red Army" brand of ammo.

I'm not trying to start a run on ammo but think we need to be aware and consider what the Obama Administration might do in the Ukranian situation. I think David and Mike are on to something here.