# Tuesday, November 24, 2009
By: Joe Huffman Tuesday, November 24, 2009 11:37:12 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Current News | Gun Rights )

I just finished a quick reading of the Brady brief in McDonald v. Chicago. The short answer as to the question, "What are they up to?" is:

This Court should conclude that regulations of firearms are not subject to strict scrutiny, but instead are subject to a deferential, reasonableness standard of review.

They have apparently concluded McDonald et. al. will win and are trying to minimize the damage to their goals.

What I find most interesting is this:

The policy implications of such a ruling could be devastating, given the demonstrated success of reasonable state and federal gun laws in reducing the use of guns in crime and saving lives. Reasonable gun laws such as licensing for gun dealers and owners, registration, background checks, and safe storage laws have been associated with reduced risk of gun deaths and criminal access to guns.

Contrast that with this:

I am not arguing here that higher rates of gun ownership cause higher rates of crime, violent crime, or homicide. Such causation is difficult to show because so many other factors bear on the incidence of crime. For instance, simple cross-national comparisons of gun availability and crime do not control for the degree to which various countries impose legal restrictions on firearms. It also is difficult to sort out whether high levels of gun ownership lead to high crime rates or whether high crime rates lead to high levels of gun ownership.

Dennis A. Henigan
Vice President for Law and Policy at the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence and Founder of its Legal Action Project.
Lethal Logic: Exploding the Myths That Paralyze American Gun Policy, page 107.

On one hand the Brady Campaign claims the thousands of restrictions on gun ownership have "demonstrated success" but they also claim they don't, or perhaps can't, know if high gun ownership rates cause crime. And of course their "demonstrated success" stories are highly contested. Even the CDC says, "Evidence was insufficient to determine the effectiveness of any of these laws."

As usual, it's half truths that give them traction.

Update: Sebastian points out more half-truths that are far more substantive than my find.

By: Joe Huffman Tuesday, November 24, 2009 4:49:38 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Crap for brains | Current News | Gun Rights )

As Sebastian reported yesterday it appears we may have another major attack on our gun rights coming up. I'm of the opinion our allies in D.C. should suggest amendments to the bill to include terrorist list checks before people are allowed to become members of a religion, or maybe in a different political climate before being allowed to not have a religion. And of course, since ideas are more powerful than guns they should take the advice of Joseph Stalin and check their lists before allowing people to express their ideas as well. 

Given that Stalin and the former Soviet Union are now drawn into this I can point out that Dr. Strangelove is apparently alive and is now contributing to the war on the other side. The enemies of freedom are now claiming the U.S. government needs to Close the Terror Gap.

I think Strangelove's "mine shaft gap" made more sense.

By: Joe Huffman Tuesday, November 24, 2009 4:20:46 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Gun Rights )

As reported by Kevin, Say Uncle, Sebastian, Dave Workman, and probably others there was "Another victory for zero tolerance" (as Workman said it) recently. A kid was suspended from school for following the rules. Or just as accurately the principal did not follow the rules and punished a kid.

I could say a whole lot about this but ten years ago Fritz Sands said it sufficiently well in two sentences that ten paragraphs by me would be wasted effort.

By: Joe Huffman Tuesday, November 24, 2009 3:31:01 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Bloggers | Boomershoot | Home Life | Quote of the Day | Work )

If you would not be forgotten
As soon as you are dead and rotten,
Either write things worthy reading,
Or do things worth the writing.

Ben Franklin
[Or both.

Boomershoot, this blog, the software I have written (some used by 100s of millions), the hardware I have designed (10s of thousands of units shipped), and my children are my attempts.--Joe]

# Monday, November 23, 2009
By: Joe Huffman Monday, November 23, 2009 9:42:52 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Gun Rights )

I find it interesting that pro-gun people have heated internal debates about the NRA being "too soft" or GOA being ineffective, etc.

It turns out the anti-gun people have similar problems and internal debates. Dennis Henigan from The Brady Campaign, devotes an entire chapter (Chapter 3: "But What You Really Want ...") in his book Lethal Logic. In part he complains the VPC (see pages 79, 80, and note 9) causes them problems because their advocacy of total handgun bans can be effectively cited as evidence that a "slippery slope argument" is valid. Henigan claims the Brady Campaign does not advocate a total ban on handguns. I will give him the point that Pete Shields (chair of the National Council to Control Handguns, which later became Handgun Control, Inc., which later became the Brady Campaign) saying in 1979 that the ultimate goal was banning handguns is insufficient evidence that the present day goal is the same as it was 30 years ago.

This doesn't explain why they supported the ban on guns in Washington D.C. But it may explain why they are filing a brief in support of neither party in the Chicago Gun Case.

But if the Brady Campaign wants to appear as moderates and neutralize the slippery slope argument they need to reign in some of their allies. Case in point is what is being said in California about Jerry Brown filing a brief in the Chicago case arguing the 2nd Amendment should be incorporated:

In July, before the court agreed to take the case, Brown went so far as to file his own friend-of-the-court brief asking that Chicago's gun ban be overturned - arguing that if the court doesn't act, "California citizens could be deprived of the constitutional right to possess handguns in their homes."

His stance has angered a number of gun control proponents.

Julie Leftwich, legal director of Legal Community Against Violence, said this isn't simply about Brown defending the Second Amendment - it also marks a dramatic turnabout from the administration of his Democratic predecessor, Bill Lockyer, a staunch gun control advocate.

"Jerry Brown hasn't shown leadership in the legislative arena related to the issue of gun violence prevention ... and he hasn't sponsored or weighed in on any significant gun bills," Leftwich told The Chronicle's Carla Marinucci.

It's possible Leftwich hasn't read Brown's brief (I haven't either) but if the article cited above is correct then Brown is merely trying to protect the right of the people to keep and bear arms in their homes. Leftwich apparently is opposed to this. Has the Brady Campaign contacted Leftwich and company to asked them to tone it down? She's hurting their cause, right? If they haven't then their silence is very telling.

Even if the Brady Campaign leadership is opposed to the banning of handguns and they only want "reasonable regulations" they risk making themselves obsolete if they were to get everything they want. At that time they would have to either adopt new, more extreme goals, or existing "extremists" such as the VPC and company will rise to power in their place.

This is the reason why the Brady Campaign's claim of the Heller decision will make gun control legislation easier is false.* In essence the "slippery slope argument" was working and if that end goal was unobtainable they believed they could make progress toward something that, only coincidentally, was in the same direction (such as gun registration). But those extremists will always exist. If the Brady's were to fall from power because of near complete success in their present goal either they would change their goals or others would fill the power vacuum. Hence the "slippery slope argument" will always be valid.



*Alan Gottlieb recently told me this in a single, somewhat obscure, sentence. But I didn't immediately understand what he was saying. It took a number of days before I figured out the essence of his insight.
By: Joe Huffman Monday, November 23, 2009 5:29:27 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Freedom | Quote of the Day )

500 rounds of 9mm is cheaper, faster and also allows for a few entertainment kneecappings.

Phil
November 23, 2009
RNS Quote of the Day: 11/23/09
[If it were only that easy to solve the problems in Washington Phil would need several semi-trucks to haul all the donated ammo to D.C. with him.--Joe]

# Sunday, November 22, 2009
By: Joe Huffman Sunday, November 22, 2009 6:26:17 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Gun Rights )

If this woman had to wait a week to possess a gun she would likely be dead now--instead of her stalker:

The quotes of most interest to me are from the police dispatcher, "It's only been two minutes." And "They are almost there."

When seconds matter the police are only minute away.

By: Joe Huffman Sunday, November 22, 2009 5:25:25 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Gun Fun )

I got a chance to use my STI in competition again today. It had broken and I had been whining about being less than happy with both of my competition guns.

At a Steel Challenge match today my STI Eagle performed flawlessly and most of the time I did my part properly too. I placed second:

Lewiston Pistol Club
"Steel Match-- August 23, 2009"
Place Shooter Class Smoke n Hope Roundabout Frying M Paradox I Don't Know Total Time Down
1 Adam M Limited

12.98

12.34

11.81

13.57

12.60

 

63.30

---

2 Joe H Limited

16.30

15.86

14.26

17.38

14.48

 

78.28

14.98

3 Don W Limited

13.17

14.24

23..69

17.12

11.32

 

79.54

16.24

4 KW H Limited

16.64

16.29

16.88

19.04

17.48

 

86.33

23.03

5 Bill M Limited

23.32

23.35

17.97

30.65

21.94

 

117.23

53.93

6 Jason E Limited

24.68

23.63

25.67

25.48

18.58

 

118.04

54.74

7 Erik F Limited

23.21

28.88

25.36

29.60

20.18

 

127.23

63.93

Bold Cells denote stage winner.

Yeah. I know. Some of the best competitor stayed away because of the snow and cold but I figure that makes them losers anyway.

By: Joe Huffman Sunday, November 22, 2009 4:41:38 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Boomershoot | Gun Fun )

My first chronograph was something I bought about 15 years ago from an estate sale and it was old then. It died a couple years ago and the new one I bought was a CED Millennium. Because there were times in which the light started getting low that I had problems getting readings with my old chronograph I splurged and got the Infrared Screen Set with the new unit. Today I was glad I did.

I had used the IR screens  in near total darkness just to test them and got good results. But today it was just very dark and cloudy from the snow storm coming in. I put 10 rounds from my .40 S&W over the screens and got good readings but when I tried a .22 LR there was nothing. Rats! I really wanted those numbers too. I have been thinking there is something I could try to make Boomerite a little more sensitive and the normal .22 LR ammo I use for testing (CCI Stingers) hasn't been in any of the local stores (I now see it is available some places on-line). I wanted data on some other ammo to see if I could replace the Stingers. CCI Velocitor was the prime candidate and I didn't want to make another trip to the range or waste time getting chronograph data at the Boomershoot site.

I got out the inverter (every vehicle should have one), plugged in the IR screens, and every shot recorded a velocity.

I'm now very happy with the chronograph and IR screens.

In my rifle the Stingers clock in with muzzle velocities of about 1605 fps and the Velocitors at about 1320 fps. But from looking at my notes it appears that the Velocitors should detonate the targets at 25 yards even though they are quite a bit slower than the Stingers.

By: Joe Huffman Sunday, November 22, 2009 4:28:29 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Freedom | Gun Rights | Quote of the Day )

Statists in office are tragically ill personalities. They are control freaks on steroids. Without the delusion that the people are stupid, officials have no personal sense of purpose. Without official recognition of our sovereignty over them, officials have no sense of purpose. Officials are not smarter than the electorate, they're meaner and more cold-blooded than we are, but not smarter. They are not better informed than we are: they ignore liberty truths and are informed of nothing by comparison. The truth is that officials have only that authority which we grant them. We retain all supreme authority in this country, and it is this which they ignore against the interests of the United States herself. Without crisis, manufactured by them or not, there is no sense of purpose for them. The truth is that they are truly unneeded for so many programs.

John Longenecker
November 22, 2009
Safer Streets 101: Saying No to socialism and gun control.
[I'm reminded of something closely related which I said a couple years ago.--Joe]

# Saturday, November 21, 2009
By: Joe Huffman Saturday, November 21, 2009 9:20:23 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Gun Rights | Quote of the Day )

Those behind the badge don't believe more restrictions on honest gun owners is a reasonable, practical or constitutional response to acts of terrorism. As a retired officer, I know that America's men and women in blue want to fight terrorism, to stop terrorists; not waste time keeping records on innocent gun owners.

Jim Fotis
November 19, 2009
Law Enforcement Alliance of America Executive Director

# Friday, November 20, 2009
By: Joe Huffman Friday, November 20, 2009 11:47:54 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Home Life | Quote of the Day )

You would be a fool to compete with Xenia.

Professor D.
November 16, 2009
Professor of Art History at the University of Idaho
This was to a student that got 87% on a test and whined to the prof that Xenia won a bet on who would get a better test grade. Xenia got a 112%.

# Thursday, November 19, 2009
By: Joe Huffman Thursday, November 19, 2009 7:14:38 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Bloggers | Sex )

A 34-year-old research scientist at the Bristol Initiative for Child Health recently announced that she is the (formally) anonymous blogger known as Belle de Jour --Diary of a London Call Girl.

To me the most interesting part of the revelation is the following:

Dr Magnanti, who studied anthropology and maths in Florida, was completing a PhD at Sheffield University's department of forensic pathology when she became a call girl.

Realizing she had no objection to having sex for money, she contacted an agency and worked as a prostitute from 2003 to late 2004, which she said was 'so much more enjoyable' than her shifts in another job as a computer programmer.

This reminds me of another woman I met at a party about four years ago. Let's call her 'N'. She was middle aged but very physically fit. After only a sentence or two you knew she was smart and not just an empty head on a pretty body. Talking about what kind of work we did it came out that she had been an engineer for many years, traveled all over the world for her job and finally got tired of it and quit. After a few months she started thinking about what kind of job she wanted to have. She was pretty sure she wanted a career change but wasn't sure what she would like to do and have the time and interest to go to school to get the required training. She was sitting in the park with a female friend of hers who finally asked, "If you could do anything you wanted for a living what would it be?" N answered, "I would like to get paid to f**k." And her friend answered, "So darling, why don't you? How do you think I worked my way through medical school?"

And so it came to be that N started her new and very profitable career without any formal training. She told me she had been doing it (pun intended) for a few years and was making more money than she ever imagined. She mostly lived alone although she had a steady lover that she spend most of her non-work nights with. She had a home in Bellevue Washington (generally an expensive part of the Seattle area) and was in the process of putting on a 10,000 square foot addition to the house. Part of it was her new "playroom".

She said she was 40 years old but she let slip the age of her parents and I didn't think anything of it until I saw the alarm in her eyes as she quickly added, "They became parents when they were much older than most." I did the math and didn't say anything but I then noticed the wrinkles in the hands and a few other places. I suspect her true age was really in the early fifties.

Out of curiosity, knowing full well that Barb wouldn't approve a budget item like that, I asked what sort of rates she charged. IIRC it was $400 for 90 minutes, $800 for four hours, or $1400 for the entire night. Weekend trips to exotic and interesting places would have discounts. She guaranteed she could be taken to company Christmas parties and the like and never embarrass you. Among other things she frequently did international travel with her clients as they traveled on business without their wives. She was very picky about her clients and never had more than about five or six at a time.

She painted a quite favorable picture of her new career and when I expressed my envy she told me she had a male friend trying to get into the business but most of the women were significantly overweight and wanted some sort of elaborate fantasy date that consumed nearly all of what they were willing to pay. Hence although he technically was paid to have sex he didn't make any money on it.

Another woman I know, let's call her "T', did some similar work for a while but had a different result. She was about 30 years old, very pretty, behind on her rent, and food was starting to become an issue. So she started putting on "girl-girl" shows for an old retired mobster with a lot of money. He apparently only had the capacity to watch rather than participate "in the action". T got something like $600 for an hour which she had to split with the "playmate" who was a friend of hers. Occasionally some guy would participate in the show with some simulated sex and would get paid some token amount.

T was quickly able to pay her back rent and put some food on the cupboards and decided to expand her clientèle. This ended up not being such a good idea.

She told a few married or attached men friends who had made passes at her that she was available for a price with confidentiality guaranteed. Some of them took her up on the deal and something unexpected happened. Once these men friends had paid for her services they treated her much different than they had before. They treated her like crap. The did not value her smarts and friendship anymore. It was about as friendly a transaction as one would have with a candy machine. After a few months she packed up her stuff and left the state.

I told N the story of T and asked if she had anything like that happen and she said no. Her clients were all gentlemen all the time. Perhaps it was because they knew she wouldn't stand for it. It was a sellers market for her product and it wasn't a problem to "fire a customer" and find a new one.

Life just isn't fair. Not only would I never be able to find high paying customers I'd be willing to service but Barb would be certain to find some reason why it wasn't a good idea no matter how much I enjoyed my new job.

By: Joe Huffman Thursday, November 19, 2009 8:17:43 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Boomershoot | Quote of the Day )

The point of the exercise today is to show you that have never before seen some explosives at work.

Believe it or not, everything you saw on T.V.--not 100% correct.

Lt. David Woosley
November 2009
Bomb squad
Chattanooga Police Dept.
Video: ATF explosives demonstration
[Yup. The Boomershoot staff has learned a lot about explosives. Enough to know that it would be closer (but really correct) to say that 100% of what you seen on T.V. is not true.--Joe]

# Wednesday, November 18, 2009
By: Lyle at UltiMAK Wednesday, November 18, 2009 9:53:09 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Gun Fun | Technology )

We've wanted to design an optic mount for the M1 Garand rifle for years, and people have been asking us for one, but it always seemed like there was something else we had to do.  Well, here's our M1 rifle optic mount prototype.  I think it's going to be designated the M12 optic mount.  You saw it here first.

I don't know how many people have told me that their "old eyes" can't make use of the iron sights like they use to, or that it would sure be nice to have a simple way to mount a scout scope or dot sight on a Garand, etc., but it's been a lot.

If you're not familiar with the M1 rifle, it has to be loaded from the top, and when the clip of ammo you shove into the magazine runs empty, the clip is ejected forcefully out the top when the last shot is fired.  That means you can't put an optic over the top of the receiver, 'cause it gets in the way of loading and ejection.  Some M1 rifles were used with scopes mounted off to the left side, but few people like that arrangement.  It works, but you need a special mount and I understand you have to drill the receiver on your classic rifle, plus your manual clip eject button ("clip latch") is there on the left side.

This new mount replaces the handguard just in front of the receiver, clamping solid to the barrel with steel clamps and screws similar to the UltiMAK M8 for the M-14 rifle.  This is the prototype, and is left "in the white".  The production units will be anodized and finished in black.  It sits low enough to co witness (use the iron sights without removing the optic, right through the optic, in case the dot fails) with most tubular dot sights which also means you need no comb riser to get a decent cheekweld.  On this example (a vintage Springfield war horse - Thanks Mr. Devoe) I can center the dot in the Aimpoint Micro, with the rear iron sight all the way down hard, and the rear aperture is completely out of the way, yet I can still aim with the irons if I want.  It's as if the rifle, mount and Micro sight were all made for each other.  That's the way we like it.

[shameless self promotion = "off"]

I'm not putting it on our web site just yet, because we have more tweaking to do, and a lot of other things before it goes into production.  This post is just what the title says.

The M1 rifle is fascinating for several reasons.  One reason is that the gas port in the barrel (where high pressure gas is bled off to operate the action) is right near the muzzle, under the front sight, so the operating rod goes full length form the charging handle to the front sight.  We were talking here the other day about how much machining went into one of these rifle, and how many were made in a short time.  Amazing.  Its design led to a whole family of long guns, including the M-14, M1A, Mini-14, Mini-30, and the M1 Carbine shares some things in common with it.  Back in the day the M1 was state of the art, but today it would be considered on the high end of heavy for a battle rifle, it holds a small number of rounds in the magazine, doesn't lend itself to "tactical reloads" very well, but it sure is a lot of fun, and its .30-06 cartridge packs a punch.  And look how pretty it is.  Just..just look at it.

By: Joe Huffman Wednesday, November 18, 2009 6:14:25 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Gun Rights )

I'm sure that wasn't their intent but it's nice of the VPC to put up a website and do the research to prove our point.

Sebastian shows us the VPC is misleading if not outright lying.

Joe Waldron on the WA-CCW email list points out:

85 deaths in 2.5 years, by 5,000,000+ CCW holders. I'd be willing to bet rogue cops have killed far more, per capita (6-8 times as many CCW holders as sworn police officers). 35 deaths/year on average, that's one murder per 142,000 CCW holders.

Contrast that to what the overall murder rate is in this country, 5.4 murders per 100,000. So, the average CCW holder is (5.4/100,000)/(1/142,000) or 7.668 times less likely to murder someone than your average private citizen. And that's not correcting for the exaggerations pointed out by Sebastian and the conservative numbers used by Waldron (it's actually 34/5,000,000+ or 1/147,059+). So the real number is probably on the order of 10 times less likely.

Thank you VPC.

By: Joe Huffman Wednesday, November 18, 2009 5:47:43 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Freedom | Gun Rights | Quote of the Day )

SlaughterHouse’s illegitimacy has long been all but- universally understood. It deserves to be acknowledged by this Court. Because SlaughterHouse rests on language not actually in the Constitution, contradicts the Fourteenth Amendment’s original textual meaning, defies the Framers’ intent, and supplies a nonsensical definition for Section One’s key protection of civil rights, overruling this error and its progeny remains imperative. No valid reliance interests flow from the wrongful deprivation of constitutional liberties. The reliance interest to be fulfilled remains Americans’ expectation that the constitutional amendment their ancestors ratified to protect their rights from state infringement be given its full effect.

Alan Gura
November 16, 2009
On Writ Of Certiorari To The United States Court Of Appeals For The Seventh Circuit
McDonald, et al. v. Chicago
PETITIONERS’ BRIEF, page 8
[In 1873 the SlaughterHouse cases gutted (pun intended) the 14th Amendment shortly after it was passed. This miscarriage of intent has been a thorn in the side of civil rights activists ever since. Hence, the McDonald case appeals to both conservatives and liberals for different reasons. Expect an overwhelming victory at the Supreme court for this reason.

The slaughter houses north of New Oreans were responsible for terrible pollution and disease and a solution was required. But the solution was inappropriate and should have been struck down. But just like some disgusting violent criminal who gets off because of an improperly worded search warrent or other technicality would be an outrage so it was with the Slaughterhouse case. The decision went the wrong way and, in essence, the 14th Amendment was nullified.

This sort of thing is why it is very important to have good "poster children" for the cases you take to the Supreme court. Alan Gura, The Second Amendment Foundation and company have put a lot of effort into finding the ideal "poster children" for this case. I've been promised an interview with one of the plaintiffs (they read this blog) and have been lazy in following up on that. I have all of next week off and plan to get it done sometime before I go back to work.--Joe]

# Tuesday, November 17, 2009
By: Joe Huffman Tuesday, November 17, 2009 8:22:37 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Current News | Gun Rights | Politics )

I think I detect a hint of bigotry in this headline, "Second Amendment Brief Filed by Bellevue Gun Nuts".

What if the headline had been, "Bus Boycott started by Montgomery ni**ers"?

By: Joe Huffman Tuesday, November 17, 2009 7:44:46 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Boomershoot | Crap for brains )

It's a little hard to tell from the article but it appears a guy was making .223 shell casings into explosive devices:

Robert J. Heintz Jr., 36, of Deep Creek Road, has been charged with risking a catastrophe, unlawful possession or manufacture of weapons of mass destruction and recklessly endangering another person in connection with Friday night's explosion. Heintz, who suffered a serious hand injury during the explosion, was arrested. He had been released from an area hospital on Sunday.

...

When authorities interviewed Heintz at the hospital, he claimed that he purchased .223 rounds off the Internet from Bulgaria and claimed that the tips were loose on the rounds, according to the arrest affidavit. Heintz allegedly claimed that he was attempting to place the tip back in place with a pliers at the time of the blast.

Heintz, according to the arrest affidavit, told police that he researched "some recipes on the Internet" and downloaded them on his computer. Heintz further claimed that he had mixed a batch using the instructions from the Internet and packed the substance into the .223 round, police alleged.

"He continued to explain that he attempted to ignite these rounds in his back yard with no success of detonation," Moyer alleged. "Heintz explained that he went back into the house to do another round at the computer table, packing the recipe into the brass when the bullet exploded."

He is being charged with possession or manufacture of weapons of mass destruction? That seems more than a bit excessive from the information I can glean from the article. I would have given him an honorable mention for a Darwin Award and told him to apologize to his wife for making a mess in the house.

Here is a hint for people that don't want my nomination for Darwin Awards in the Explosives catagory. Don't let metal come in contact with metal in the presence of explosives. Even if you don't use metals that can create sparks the point of contact between the two metal surfaces generates tremendous pressures. Imagine one pound of force applied to a your plies that makes contact with another piece of metal on an area that is 0.010 x 0.010 inches square. That is 10,000 PSI. Those sorts of pressures, even when confined to an exceedingly small piece of material can initiate a chain reaction. This is part of the reason so many pipe bombers end up blowing themselves up. The threads of the steel pipe create extreme pressures and start a reaction resulting in the rapid dissasembly of the bomb builder a few milliseconds later.

By: Joe Huffman Tuesday, November 17, 2009 7:40:58 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( A Security Theater | Freedom )

It's not what I preferred but it's better than nothing:

Last week, the A.C.L.U. said it dropped its suit after the T.S.A. clarified its policies in late September. The agency told screeners that, while they were encouraged to refer any suspected criminal activity or illegal contraband discovered in a checkpoint search to law enforcement officials, their job was to screen for weapons and verify passenger identities. “Traveling with large amounts of currency is not illegal,” the T.S.A. added in an internal directive on Oct. 29.

I first wrote about it here.

By: Joe Huffman Tuesday, November 17, 2009 7:23:56 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Gun Rights | Quote of the Day )

The decision under review, from the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, concerns firearms ordinances of two Illinois municipalities, Chicago and Oak Park, that effectively ban the private possession of handguns and unreasonably burden the possession of all firearms. There is no question that, under this Court’s decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, 128 S. Ct. 2783 (2008), the categorical ban on handguns, at a minimum, would run afoul of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution were it enacted by the Federal government or the District of Columbia. The question presented by this case is whether the Constitution also prevents State and local governments from infringing the right to keep and bear arms. For the reasons given herein and in the brief submitted by Petitioners, the answer must be yes. The Court should find either that the Second Amendment is incorporated into the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, or that the right to keep and bear arms is a privilege or immunity of citizens of the United States.

Stephan P. Halbrook, et. al.
November 16, 2009
Brief for respondents the National Rifle Association of America, Inc. et al. in support of petitioners, page 1.
[The Apex of the Triangle of Death is on the victory train leaving from Chicago.

See also the SAF brief here.--Joe]

# Monday, November 16, 2009
By: Joe Huffman Monday, November 16, 2009 7:45:22 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Gun Rights )

Dave Hardy found a piece of history.

That one little piece of paper (as I said once before) cost gun owners billions of dollars, 100's of thousands of hours, and 10's of thousands of lives.

By: Joe Huffman Monday, November 16, 2009 7:13:07 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Gun Fun )

This is the broken link on my STI Eagle 5.1 that I was whining about a few days ago:

 

It has been replaced and the gun is back on my hip. I'll take it to the range on Wednesday evening.

By: Joe Huffman Monday, November 16, 2009 7:00:55 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Crap for brains | Gun Rights | Places Without Guns )

You can add the U.K. to my list of places I don't want to visit until they start selling hunting tags for politicians and the police.

This is just too outrageous:

A former soldier who handed a discarded shotgun in to police faces at least five years imprisonment for "doing his duty". Paul Clarke, 27, was found guilty of possessing a firearm at Guildford Crown Court on Tuesday – after finding the gun and handing it personally to police officers on March 20 this year.

The jury took 20 minutes to make its conviction, and Mr Clarke now faces a minimum of five year's imprisonment for handing in the weapon. In a statement read out in court, Mr Clarke said: "I didn't think for one moment I would be arrested. I thought it was my duty to hand it in and get it off the streets."

The court heard how Mr Clarke was on the balcony of his home in Nailsworth Crescent, Merstham, when he spotted a black bin liner at the bottom of his garden. In his statement, he said:

"I took it indoors and inside found a shorn-off shotgun and two cartridges.I didn't know what to do, so the next morning I rang the Chief Superintendent, Adrian Harper, and asked if I could pop in and see him. At the police station, I took the gun out of the bag and placed it on the table so it was pointing towards the wall."

Mr Clarke was then arrested immediately for possession of a firearm at Reigate police station, and taken to the cells.

Defending, Lionel Blackman told the jury Mr Clarke's garden backs onto a public green field, and his garden wall is significantly lower than his neighbours. He also showed jurors a leaflet printed by Surrey Police explaining to citizens what they can do at a police station, which included "reporting found firearms".

Quizzing officer Garnett, who arrested Mr Clarke, he asked: "Are you aware of any notice issued by Surrey Police, or any publicity given to, telling citizens that if they find a firearm the only thing they should do is not touch it, report it by telephone, and not take it into a police station?" To which, Mr Garnett replied: "No, I don't believe so."

Prosecuting, Brian Stalk, explained to the jury that possession of a firearm was a "strict liability" charge – therefore Mr Clarke's allegedly honest intent was irrelevant. Just by having the gun in his possession he was guilty of the charge, and has no defence in law against it, he added. But despite this, Mr Blackman urged members of the jury to consider how they would respond if they found a gun. He said: "This is a very small case with a very big principle.

Bigotry against gun ownership gone wild.

Via Kevin.

By: Joe Huffman Monday, November 16, 2009 4:55:31 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Gun Rights )

Some ignorant kids across the lake from me at the University of Washington stepped in it, big time, a week or so ago. A NRA instructor stepped in and has at least partially cleaned up the mess:

When he created a group on Facebook earlier this month with the aim of quelling crime around campus, University of Washington student Stanley Luong talked of forming a "vigilante" group to patrol the area.

The idea quickly drew attention — and criticism. Facebook, a social-networking Web site, removed the group from its site.

A member of the National Rifle Association (NRA) stepped in to offer a free training class on the legal ramifications of using deadly force. And a gun range in Kent supplied a room for the meeting Sunday.

...

Rick Walker, an Olympia-area NRA gun instructor, held a free training session to six members of the group on how to get out of a threatening situation without using a gun, and the legal ramifications of using a gun in self-defense.

"I told them the first thing they should do, if they can do so safely, is call 911," Walker said. "It's the smart thing to do."

Guns are such a politically charged issue that talking to the press without having someone experienced in those matters can be a disaster. The Brady Campaign used this gaffe to further their agenda.

Please be careful out there. In more ways that one.