Category Archives: Current News

This is about stuff in the mass media that generally has a short interest life span. Speculation about an election outcome a few days before the election is an example.

Scrambled brains

Posted on by

From SPD Blotter:

When officers contacted the man—who had apparently torn out patches of his own hair—he refused to provide officers with his identity, giving them a fake name. Then he took off running.

Officers chased the man, who stopped mid-flight, picked up a large rock and turned back toward officers. Police told the man to drop the rock, which he did, before he again fled down the street, stripping off his remaining clothing as he ran.

Officers eventually found the now-completely naked suspect lying on his back in a planting strip in the 2000 block of Minor Ave E—about a half-mile from the scene of the original incident—and took him into custody.

The man told officers he had taken cocaine, methamphetamines, LSD and other unidentified drugs earlier in the evening.

After officers arrested the man, he began scratching all over his body, asked officers for his clothes, and then complained he was too hot.

…

Police weren’t immediately able to identify the man, who was unable to provide police with his real name or home address.

If the guy had tried to throw the rock at someone there is a fair chance it would have been sufficient grounds to shoot him. Don’t get your brain so scrambled with drugs that someone else is justified in scrambling it with lead. The high you get from the drugs isn’t worth the downer from the lead.

Abramski case

Posted on by

You haven’t seen a lot of outrage over the Abramski case in the gun blogosphere. It’s been mostly just a statement of the facts (see here, here, here, and here). There are some dissents (here and here) but while I agree Abramski didn’t do anything wrong in regards to the intent of congress he clearly did violate an ATF regulation. We were hoping to get the adults to put the ATF bully in their place for writing regulations unsupported by law. That didn’t happen.

That regulation should not exist because it doesn’t reflect the intent of the law in all cases. The law was intended to prevent guns from being sold to people forbidden by law from owning a gun. The question 11.a on form 4473 asks (bold in original):

Are you the actual transferee/buyer of the firearm(s) listed on this form? Warning: You are not the actual buyer if you are acquiring the firearm(s) on behalf of another person. If you are not the actual buyer, the dealer cannot transfer the firearm(s) to you. (See instructions for Question 11.a.) Exception: If you are picking up a repaired firearm(s) for another person, you are not required to answer 11.a. and may proceed to question 11.b.

The instructions do not include an exception for the situation Abramski found himself in. Hence it is clear that Abramski violated the letter of the regulation when he said that he was the actual buyer.

If I only focus on the narrow issues affecting of this case I see two things to complain about. 1) The prosecutor should never have pursued this case. Abramski didn’t deliver the gun into the hands of someone forbidden to own it. Didn’t he have a cases where there were victims to spend his time on? That the government was lied to over something this minor just doesn’t seem to be worth prosecuting over. 2) Herschel Smith explains the second issue in much better words than I can:

Regulations take on the force of law after comments responding to entries in the Federal Register are summarily ignored by the agency doing the regulating.  It makes little sense to respond with comments when the regulator’s mind is made up.  These regulations frequently far surpass the law in breadth, scope, depth and magnitude.

…

this kind of regulation seems onerous compared to what Congress wrote, but it is latitude given (and taken) by the federal regulators.  If there is a problem with legislating from the bench, there is even a worse problem with regulating by the executive branch from inside the beltway.  The problem will continue (and grow) as long as the public abides the abuse.

I haven’t read the briefs leading up to this decision but I don’t think the supporters of this case should have taken it to the Supreme Court. The only way they could have had a good chance of winning is if they had a lot of case law that supported attacking the lower court ruling on the basis of the overreaching regulation contrary to the law.

In order to get the case law to support slapping down zealous regulators we need to attack them on something less contentious like regulations forbidding the aging of cheese on wood shelves. But in those cases the regulators are going to cave like a school yard bully confronted by an adult without giving us the case law we need to confront the bullies in the ATF.

Abramski

Posted on by

Well, the Supreme Court handed down the Abramski decision. He lost.

On the one hand, it’s not unexpected, and for most of us nothing really changes: straw-man purchases are illegal. But on the other hand, the dissent basically argued that isn’t what the statute passed by congress and signed by the prez actually SAID, and thus that isn’t illegal according to the letter of the law, and trying to interpret legislative intent is a bad way to go about making decisions. The decision could have been worse, but I still wish that it had gone the other way, even if that means congress would likely pass a law in record time to “correct” the situation.

http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/abramski-v-united-states/

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/12-1493

 

Armed admins

Posted on by

Interesting news blurb today. Toppenish is a city/school district in central Washington state, about 20 miles south of Yakima. It’s a poor, gang- and crime-ridden part of the state, with lots of native Americans and Spanish speakers. It’s the sort of place that if I stop in to gas up, I’m likely the only white guy in the joint. They have decided to allow 11 administrators to exercise their 2nd Amendment (and article 24 of the WA St constitution) rights to carry arms at school. Be nice if they allowed teachers to be armed, but hey, baby steps, one at a time.

Be interesting to see how it all goes.

If guns cause people to shoot other people…

Posted on by

Then why are shooting rates among people under the same laws are so disparate?

Look at the Chicago rates discussed in a recently released paper.

To begin with, the dramatic disparities the rates of nonfatal gunshot injury:
overall it’s 46.5 per 100,000 for the city as a whole from 2006-2012.
It’s 1.62 per 100,000 for whites; 28.72 for Hispanics, and 112.83 for blacks.

For all males, it’s 44.68 per 100,000; 239.77 for black males, and for black males from 18-34 it’s 599.65.

All these people are living under the same gun laws, economic system, and mayor. Yet, the rates at which guns are used illegally vary hugely. I’m thinking maybe, just maybe, it’s something other than guns.

Open letter to Eric Holder

Posted on by

This, from Mike Vanderboegh, is interesting. It represents one of the stated ideas behind the second amendment back in the day– Something about keeping would-be tyrants “in awe”, presenting a force beyond that of any standing army, etc.

I’m not sure what good the letter could do, beyond letting Holder and Company know that we have a fairly good, general idea of what they’re up to, that we’re not all entirely intimidated, blind, cowed, distracted and demoralized. There may be some value in that and there may not, but there it is. I’ve done similar in the past, but I don’t think I’ll be doing it again.

As for the possibility of violence; I do NOT believe that, at this point anyway, Holder and Company are the slightest bit intimidated. Not in the way the author may have intended. I believe it is likely, insofar as I understand the mentality or the occupying identity that drives them, that Holder et al are quite looking forward to violence, that they’ve been getting impatient waiting for it and can’t quite understand why we’re taking so long to get with it (and thus help them fulfill their plans).

It might be more productive to try to convince Holder & Company that they themselves are mere pawns, and that once their role is served and their usefulness expired they’ll be left in the lurch, or squashed like cockroaches, by those they currently serve, but that won’t dawn on them until it’s far too late for them. It almost never does.

And so the value in such letters or postings is, at best, that later on they’ll not be able to say they weren’t warned or didn’t have any choice. In light of THAT, maybe our efforts should include defining for such unfortunates a viable way out.

Deterrence

Posted on by

You would think they would know better:

A level 3 sex offender was arrested after he kidnapped a little girl from a Beacon Hill Park.  On 6/5/14, just shortly before 7:00 p.m., the complainant called and stated that a male tried to “touch his little girl”. The complainant went on to say that the suspect was surrounded by people in the 9300 block of Carkeek Dr S.    Officers quickly arrived and found 3 people beating one male, who was down on the ground.

I sort of understood the protective instincts of parents for their offspring before I had kids. You know you should never get between a mother bear and her cubs so probably there is something similar with people.

But after they were born, it’s like, “OMG! If you try to harm one of my kids you have a death wish! You would rather have a momma bear chasing you than me because she isn’t as smart in the chase, she isn’t as persistent in the hunt, and she isn’t as creative when she catches you.”

If child kidnapping had a high risk of a nearly immediate beating and/or being shot it probably would reduce the incidence more than the threat of an arrest, prison sentence and/or GPS tracking device.

Quote of the day—Paul M. Barrett

Posted on by

A despairing parent gets wide latitude. But the NRA didn’t kill young Chris. Elliott Rodger did.

Paul M. Barrett
May 27, 2014
Santa Barbara Massacre Defies Gun Control, Mental Health Proposals: 4 Blunt Points
[That’s pretty much how I feel about the father of one of the victims as well. I’m not comfortable being critical of his inflammatory and erroneous statements when he is half-crazy with grief. If he keeps it up for a month or two then correcting him in a more firm manner becomes appropriate.—Joe]

History of the >10 mag

Posted on by

Over at the Volokh Conspiracy there is a post about the history of magazines with greater than ten rounds capacity. Very short version: The 9th Circuit court has a case challenging the greater than ten round magazine ban, called Fyock v. Sunnyvale. David Kopel co-authored an amicus brief that gives the history of such things. Many interesting factoids for gun hardware geeks to appreciate, and many things for gun-rights people in general. Many things I knew, many more I didn’t. Worth a read.

It’s another good case to watch.

This could be interesting

Posted on by

Seattle police are suing the DOJ, The City of Seattle, Seattle Mayor, Seattle Chief of Police, and others about restrictions on their use of force and the right of self-defense protected by the Second Amendment:

When a police officer is confronted with threatening behavior, he or she has the fundamental, individual right of self-defense under the Second Amendment, consistent with every other citizen, to protect himself or herself, and others, from apparent and immediate harm. As the Court has long recognized, the rules that define and determine self-defense are of universal application and are not affected by the character of a person’s employment.

This could be far more interesting than one might first guess. If the courts accept this argument then not only is the right to carry in public by private citizens bolstered but the rights of people to carry while at work is given support as well.

H/T to Dave Workman. See also the Seattle PI article.

The Land – a real playground

Posted on by

An interesting article in The Atlantic Magazine. A “junk yard” playground that is very popular. Apparently the story is making the rounds in my kid’s school district. I doubt it will change anything, but it’s a start. It’s similar to one from Kiwi Land.

Upshot of the two: more reasonable risk-taking, fewer rules, more natural consequences are better for kids than bubble-wrap and bureaucracy. Well, duh!

Right in line with your memories of the dump, Lyle.

Unilateral disarmament

Posted on by

Obama wants it for the nation. If this report is true, and it happens because it’s more than just a stupidly stupid budget-battle bargaining chip, Obama wants to eliminate the Tomahawk and Hellfire missile programs. And what’s he plan to replace it with? A plan for a missile that likely won’t be ready for another decade…. Urk?

I think the guy is both a fool AND actively trying to destroy the nation. This isn’t just anti-hawkish, or dovish, it’s an invitation to a serious mauling of our allies. I cannot fathom the idiocy of anyone still retaining an “Obama-Biden” bumper-sticker on their car.

9th slaps Hawaii, now shall-issue

Posted on by

The 9th Curcuit Court, crazy as it is, decided it was time to piss in someone’s oatmeal. Specifically, Hawaii. Short version: because of Peruta, Hawaii is now a “shall-issue” concealed carry state.

Totally tubular!

More on registration

Posted on by

This should have occurred to me much sooner. The world is unstable. Trouble in the Middle East is growing. Putin’s Russia is pining for a return of the “Glory” of the Soviet Union while radical Islamists pine for a new global caliphate, and China is a rising military power. The U.S. Continues to commit economic suicide. We’re well on the way to becoming a full-on surveillance state, with global information sharing.

You’re homosexual and you want to get married, thus putting your name on a list (a database) of homosexuals.

As gun owners and supporters of liberty, we know well the dangers of registration and lists, as they almost always lead to confiscation or something else unpleasant.

Just sayin’. Once the novelty of this great idea of “gay” marriage wears off, there’s nothing left but the long term implications. Communists, socialists, Progressives, Fascists and jihadists aren’t known for their respect of basic human rights, whatever they may have you thinking right now. And they all love lists, and the more detail the better. Lists are power to them. And they all consider the Earth to be vastly over-populated already.

As a white, male, heterosexual business owner, employer and father who has guns and openly advocates liberty, I’m already a target of just about everyone else on the planet. I’m already out of the closet, so to speak, and so I’m not afraid to say this. Someone had to.

I’ve never been all enthusiastic, eager and giddy about being added to yet another list in someone else’s database, speaking just for myself. Some friends of mine, a man and a woman, just got married, and kept it off record as much as possible. In their minds it’s none of the state’s bloody business. Maybe later you’ll be glad to have read this. I don’t know.

‘Fascinating…’

Posted on by

…said First Officer Spock as he raised one eyebrow.

It may be that some people in the government class are beginning to “get it” but we’ll have to remain vigilant and see. An “emergency bill” in Idaho to nullify federal gun laws has passed without a single “nay” vote. It’s now up to Governor Marshmallow.

“It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this act to protect Idaho law enforcement officers from being directed, through federal executive orders, agency orders, statutes, laws, rules, or regulations enacted or promulgated on or after the effective date of this act, to violate their oath of office and Idaho citizens’ rights under Section 11, Article I, of the Constitution of the State of Idaho.”

News article here.

The act applies only to future federal encroachments, and so the language, “…protect Idaho law enforcement officers from being directed…to violate their oath of office and Idaho citizens’ rights…” has a grandfather clause in effect. It means, quite literally and specifically, that violating the Oath of Office and citizens’ rights is perfectly OK (and maybe even laudable) so long as said violations have existing laws, etc. as a pretext.

I suppose we can take this as a sign of progress, but we need to be careful and not celebrate too enthusiastically. Happy Days are not here again, innocent people are still in jail, the guilty are still being paid out of our pockets, and the skies above are rather cloudy. I don’t believe that anyone in government “gets it”, so much as they’re merely able to see which way a gale is blowing. Still, there is hope.

Butt out?

Posted on by

Well now this is interesting.

==================
Wyoming, a deeply pro-gun state, has taken the lead in the case, spurred by Gov. Mead, who called the New Jersey law a threat to citizens’ freedom everywhere.

“This decision out of New Jersey impacts the right to keep and bear arms outside the home,” Mead said. “So I felt it was necessary to have the [state] attorney general support a petition to the Supreme Court to hear this case.”

Some in New Jersey are pushing back on the intervention from outsiders. A Feb. 18 editorial published by the website NJ.com called on them to “butt out.”
==================

“Butt out.” The Southern states said very much the same thing back in the middle 1800s, claiming the right to enslave other people and the right to be “free” from outside meddling in that endeavor. There is of course no such right, as there is no “right” to violate any right. That simple and obvious concept is what brought us Incorporation Doctrine.

I don’t like that term “deeply pro-gun”. It’s not quite as bad as “severely conservative” but it is barking up the same tree. How about simply “pro-human rights” as in, “Wyoming, a more pro-human rights state”…? Better yet, “less intrusive upon human rights” or “a less coercive state” would provide a more realistic perspective. That is if we care about perspective with regard to basic principles.

Online firearm sale fraud

Posted on by

From the ATF:

Advisory Letter

Online Scams Using Fraudulent Federal Firearms Licenses
March 7, 2014

TO ALL FEDERAL FIREARMS LICENSEES AND FIREARM PURCHASERS

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) is providing the following information to make you aware of fraudulent online firearms sales. Some individuals are using fraudulently altered Federal firearms licenses to sell but never deliver firearms online.

A typical online scam starts with an online firearm advertisement. Purchasers who respond to the advertisement by telephone or email receive an invalid, counterfeit copy of a license that appears to be valid. After sending payment, the purchaser never receives the advertised firearm(s) and the fraudulent seller removes the original online advertisement and contact information.

To help you avoid this scam, licensees are reminded that only transactions between licensees require the furnishing of a certified copy of the license. Licensees should consider only providing the basic license number to individuals (e.g., 1-75-12345). The individuals can use FFL eZ Check to confirm the validity of the license number before sending payment for firearms advertised online. FFL eZ Check is on the ATF website at http://www.atf.gov/content/firearms/firearms-industry/applications-FFL-eZ-check. If you have general questions regarding the FFL eZ Check system, you may contact the Federal Firearms Licensing Center at 1-877-560-2435.

You may also wish to contact other Federal, State, and local resources regarding internet fraud, to include the Federal Bureau of Investigation (www.IC3.gov), the Federal Trade Commission (www.ftc.gov), your State’s Attorney General’s office (http://www.atf.gov/files/publications/download/p/atf-p-5300-5-31st-editiion/attorneys-general.pdf) and your local law enforcement agency.

If you are a Federal firearms licensee who believes your license has been fraudulently used, stolen, or compromised, please contact your local ATF field office as soon as possible for assistance. A list of local field offices can be found at http://www.atf.gov/content/contact-us/local-atf-office.

I find it interesting that con-artists are using a government issued licenses as a means of gaining the trust of their victims. An FFL license was never intended to be used in such a manner. Had it not existed it is likely other, and better, means of seller verification would have evolved such as it has on eBay and other online seller web sites. Hence it could be argued that the Federal Government, via the ATF, has enabled fraud. But then most government is a fraud so it shouldn’t be too surprising that fraudsters are enabling each other.

Campus carry in Idaho

Posted on by

Via email from “Alpha Mike” regarding campus carry in Idaho:

Campus carry passed 50-19-1 (Cindy Agidius was conveniently out of town for the vote).

Call Governor Otter’s office if you support. Don’t call if you oppose.

http://gov.idaho.gov/ourgov/contact.html

The phone number is 208-334-2100 or use the link above to send an email.

See also the news on the topic:

Our opponents are saying (via email):

Despite strong opposition, SB 1254 (guns on campus) passed the Idaho Senate and House. It’s now on the way to the Governor, so this is our last chance to stop it.

Senate Bill 1254 would strip the authority of state-supported colleges and universities in Idaho to regulate in matters relating to firearms. Currently, all state-supported colleges and universities in Idaho prohibit the possession of firearms on their campuses.

Specifically, this legislation paves the way for retired law enforcement and individuals – students, faculty, staff, and visitors – who possess an enhanced permit to carry concealed weapons to bring loaded handguns onto campus grounds and buildings, including classrooms, libraries, and student recreation centers. Firearms would be prohibited in (1) student dormitories and (2) “public entertainment facilities” with a seating capacity of at least 1,000 provided signage is posted at each point of entry. In addition, the legislation does not restrict the open carrying of a firearm in the above mentioned places.

Contact Governor Otter now to tell him that guns (concealed and openly carried) don’t belong on our college campuses. Veto this bill (S.1254) >>

Please take action today and share. Thanks.

Andy Pelosi
Director
GunFreeKids.org and the Campaign to Keep Guns off Campus

In other words GunFreeKids wants colleges and universities to continue their bigoted policies of creating Second Amendment free zones. They are either so ignorant or evil that they want to continue the policies that enable the Virginia Tech massacre.

Encourage Governor Otter to let my daughter Kim and others attending and working at colleges in Idaho to be able to defend themselves with the best tools available should they need to stop an attack. We need to eliminate another set of “gun free” killing zones and this is a battle we can easily win and provide yet another example of how the right to keep and bear arms is not a “recipe for disaster”.

Update: My email to Governor Otter:

Please sign SB 1254 allowing my daughter (University of Idaho) and others attending and working at colleges in Idaho to be able to defend themselves with the best tools available should they need to stop an attack. Virginia Tech was a “gun free” school but actually was a killing zone where innocent, law abiding, people were helpless against one person with a gun and evil intent.

The Virginia Tech shooting was a rare event but lesser attacks are not. Please sign this bill and eliminate these embarrassing “Second Amendment Free Zones” from our state.

Regards,

Joe Huffman
The View From North Central Idaho
https://blog.joehuffman.org/

Possible path in CT

Posted on by

Following the gun and magazine restriction news I didn’t like who things were playing out. Looked like there were way to many ways to make it turn ugly all around. While I’m sure someday tyrants will need to be used as tree-watering sources, I’d really rather not have it happen during my life- revolutions are expensive. I thought of a possible path out after watching this clip.

Stage an arrest of a “known offender” as a test case. Arrange for someone with an “unlawful” magazine and a barely illegal rifle (maybe something like a Nylon 66, or whatever the most innocuous technically illegal arm you can find) who is retired and can afford to spend a little time in jail. Roll the cameras, arrest and charge him, and have everyone on the scene know what’s going on so that nobody gets shot. Get him before a judge that day, and have a temporary order to put a hold on the law until it can be officially decided by a court. That gives the police an out to not enforce the law, but it also gives the citizens an out because it can’t be held over them for anything else so things do go all Waco on anyone. It gives everyone time to “let the court sort it out” without claiming any unnecessary lives. It also gives time for a new legislature to be elected if needed, because it will become a more well-understood topic by a broader range of the population.

Mugme Street news

Posted on by

Visible from my office in downtown Seattle is a street Barb calls Mugme Street. Just walking down the sidewalk in broad daylight makes all kinds of alarms go off in my head. It is rare that I don’t see at least one, and sometimes a half dozen cops, loitering around within a one block length of the street. They remind me of vultures in orbit waiting for another body to dispose of.

On February 19th:

The victim in the attack was leaving a store near 3rd and Pike Around 10:30 PM on February 19th, when five men jumped him.

The suspects knocked the victim to the ground, where they punched and kicked him. The victim was able to get up and run from the suspects, but was attacked again further down the street.

After receiving a 911 call about the incident, medics arrived and transported the victim to Harborview, where police interviewed him about the incident.

The victim, who was left with bruises and cuts all over his head and body, wasn’t able to give police many details about the suspects, only describing them as ”five black males.”

On February 21st:

Just shortly before midnight, officers responded to a call of a shooting at 3rd Ave and Pine St. Officers located the victim in the alley behind a business  (the 200 block of Pine St – alley north.)

While there were a number of people with and around the victim, no one could provide information about what happened.  A garbage truck driver that was nearby said that he saw a group of young males get out of two vehicles that were parked in the lot. They crossed Pine St and went around the corner into the 1500 block of 2nd Ave.

A short time later, he heard a pop, possibly a gunshot, and the group then came running back around the corner.

The 17-year-old victim was taken to Harborview Medical Center by Seattle Fire medics with non-life threatening injuries.

Although I had previously seen the reports Ry also sent me a link to the first report and Rolf emailed me a link to the second.