Publicola on Hugh Hewitt

Just got in from my after-work commute. I was going through the dial when Hugh Hewitt said he was going to talk about Harriet Miers and the Second Amendment, and that he would be speaking with Publicola, no doubt due to this post.

Hewitt doesn't think we'll ever get to a standard of strict scrutiny on 2A, and thinks intermediate scrutiny is the best we can hope for, particularly because the voters would never go for uninfringed rkba.

Newsflash to Hugh--some of us will accept nothing less. We don't need a majority--all we need is the critical mass of voters to deny victory. And no, we will not lose our gun rights if the Democrats are elected--that is, not unless we surrender them. Some of us--I pray a critical mass--won't do that, either.

Congratulations, Publicola, on getting national radio exposure.

The Unreal McCoy

Larry McCoy, owner of Larry's Gun Shop in the 2700 block of Pleasant Valley Road just off Government Boulevard, said Monday that he sells a Romanian-made, AK-47-style weapon for $400.

McCoy said federal law states that a person 18 or older who is not a convicted felon can legally purchase a semiautomatic assault rifle.

Anyone who meets the federal requirements can be in and out of his shop within 10 minutes, armed with an AK-47-style weapon and bullets.

McCoy said, however, that he will not sell an assault rifle to anyone under 21 because he does not believe a teenager is mature enough to handle such a weapon.

Larry, assuming you actually said that, you really have no clue, do you?

Funny, though. Publicola quoted you a few years back when you said:

I think it's a fine rifle. I think most people buy them to hunt with, but you can use them for self-protection.

I know some will call to boycott you for your prejudice, Larry, but not me, at least not yet (however, any gun owner reading all of Publicola's post ought to tell everyone they know to avoid Rowell's Sporting Goods in Semmes).

No, what I propose is to actually send more business your way by having someone under 21 attempt to buy a semiauto rifle from you and then sue you for age discrimination if you refuse. Or, you could just claim being misquoted and proceed with the sale. In the mean time, if you meant what you were reported saying, you might want to tell some of these guys you don't think they're "mature" enough to be full-fledged Larry's Gun Shop customers.

As for the other implications of this story, i.e., hysterics over the sight of someone bearing arms, Fits has that covered.

[Via Sean Young]

Publicola, We Hardly Knew Ye

Publicola is throwing in the towel.

I understand the motivation.

There goes one of our better voices. Keep your fingers crossed that we haven't heard the last from him.

Plea for Help: Publicola Was Here

Read Publicola's take, written in Sept. 2003, on the lawsuit against the "Plea for Help" gun store owners.

Counter Intelligence

The guy ponders for 20 minutes, musing about the danger of nighttime intruders entering his house from an adjacent golf course, and then buys one. [More]

Right, like that's the only possible way he could ever be in danger, right, smart @$$ Bloomberg lickspittle?

There's an old legend that a vampire can't cross your threshold unless you invite him in. I don't why a gun store wouldn't tell a Bloomberg reporter to get lost. Are they really that oblivious that they think the guy isn't looking to do a hit piece?

And then there's this:

Like many FFL holders, Hopkins would have no objection to universal background checks for all gun transfers. 

Anyone in the business who's not leading in the fight against universal registration, especially now in the time of great need, and actually telling that to a Bloomberg reporter, deserves to have his business go belly-up as far as I'm concerned. And the FFLs who look forward to it as a new business opportunity are no better than damn kapos.

I've told the Nevada folks they ought to have a list of who in the business isn't helping.  I don't see them taking off the gloves though, and that's a shame, because this bar fight calls for swinging chairs and breaking bottles.

[Via Publicola]

How To End The Colorado Magazine Capacity Limits

That creates an interference in interstate commerce that is not permissible for a state to engage in. [More]

Publicola walks us through his proposal.

There's always the more direct way, as long as you're willing to take risks.

It's Back

Publicola... [More]

Been a while.

Re-added to the WogRoll.

Reichstyles of the Rich and Famous

Yesterday’s Publicola revelation that anti-gun billionaire Michael Bloomberg has personally contributed another $285,000 to pass Initiative 594 in Washington state suggests that the former New York mayor will stop at nothing to push his brand of restrictive gun control into law across the country, worried activists suggest. [More]

The finest citizen disarmament edicts money can buy... 

And yeah, he will stop at nothing.

Book 'em, Danno!

"Republican Bill Crozier says if he's elected he would put thick, used textbooks under every desk for students to use as self-defense...

I share Publicola's sentiments on this ridiculous proposal. I prefer the "bandukwale sir" method, myself, although I realize others with far more influence among gun owners than I will ever have advocate differently...

Incidentally, you can see a video of the book test here.

Questions and Answers III

Before proceeding, it would probably be a good idea to read Part I and Part II if you haven't already.

Mr. Licht continues:

I am asking sincerely as a newly minted (though not born yesterday) attorney that wants to make the second amendment (and the constitution) the law of the land for my children (and yours). Everywhere I look I don’t see it as a practical reality. As much as I want to believe in the second, it seems like a mass delusion (or worse) a cynical use of the concept for pure fund raising hype with no expectation (by the professional promoters) that there is any argument to win.

We should all be familiar with the letter John Ashcroft wrote to the NRA proclaiming "[L]et me state unequivocally my view that the text and the original intent of the Second Amendment clearly protect the right of individuals to keep and bear firearms."

That was bold language for a sitting attorney general. It filled the "pro-gun" community with hope. It evidently aligned their interests with those of the Republican party, especially when the treasonous record of Democrats in general on the Second Amendment is considered.

Often overlooked is the footnote Ashcroft added, a seemingly innocuous "*Your actual mileage may vary" kind of statement that, on the surface, would not create too much concern with conservative "law and order" gun-owning voters:

Of course, the individual rights view of the Second Amendment does not prohibit Congress from enacting laws restricting firearms ownership for compelling state interests, such as prohibiting firearms ownership by convicted felons, just as the First Amendment does not prohibit shouting “fire” in a crowded movie theater. As Samuel Adams explained at the Massachusetts ratifying convention, the proposed Constitution should”never [be] construed . . .to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms.”

With all due respect to Mr. Ashcroft, he's describing a prior restraint on the Second Amendment and a response to an act for his First Amendment example. So he's talking apples and oranges, but most people never noticed. Besides--you can yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater.

What this does is justify the feds being in the "gun crime" business, even though there is no enumerated Constitutional authority delegated to them in this area by We the People. Further, it reflects a belief that the unambiguous "shall not be infringed" from the Bill of Rights is trumped by the open-ended and amorphous standard of "compelling state interest," a term found nowhere in the Constitution, and which can be twisted and contorted as much as, say, the Interstate Commerce Clause.

Republican Kool-Aid vendor Hugh Hewitt--a man with an awesome understanding of Constitutional law as practiced by "the establishment"--practically admitted as much when blogger Publicola called in to his program. "Intermediate scrutiny," Hewitt pronounced, is the best gun owners can hope for on the Second Amendment.

From a political "pragmatism" perspective, and as much as this may infuriate us, he's probably right. If we rely on "the system," with the current state of gun owner awareness, involvement and commitment, we'll be left with the Second (Class) Amendment from the Bill of Rights (Lite).

This means practically every "gun control" edict will find justification for being upheld. What judge won't find a "compelling state interest" to license gun owners, or register them, or subject citizens to the prior restraint of background checks, or permitting (and prohibiting!) the acceptable manner, places and conditions for bearing arms, concealed or otherwise. Certainly a "compelling state interest" can be found to keep "weapons of war off our streets," thus securing the National Firearms Act and FOPA '86, and blocking further inroads against GCA '68...

This is the door Ashcroft left open--one that would allow his boss and his successor to both proclaim support for renewing the "assault weapon" ban. But it was not his footnote that got the attention, was it? Gun owners almost had an orgy over the "sea change" in attitude-- without asking what in practice had really changed.

We tested Mr. Ashcroft's sincerity with a petition you may have seen circulating a few years back. Without going into a lot of detail, which you can catch up on here, we stated grievances of California gun owners who have had their rights unlawfully abridged, specifying the violations in detail. The theory was, had any other right been abused by local or state governments, such as the rights of minorities to vote, or to enjoy full lawful use of public accommodations, etc., the Justice Department would be quick to send a team down to enforce "the supreme law of the land" by which all subordinate political entities are supposedly bound.

Did we think this was really going to happen? We'd have been floored, but we thought it important to separate rhetoric from (lack of) deeds--if we were being sold a bill of goods, that is, Ashcroft mouthing support for 2A with no action offered or taken, we'd at least be able to point out that we were being played.

Over the course of the year the "Ashcroft Petition" was promoted, we managed to get over 30,000 gun owners to sign on from every state of the union. Understand we did this with no budget or donation requests, strictly as part time volunteers--and this was not an Internet petition, but one that required actual signatures. Over the course of the year we mailed several large boxes of signed petitions to the AG, along with cover letters summarizing our project and reminding him of our previous correspondences. The only acknowledgment we ever received was a non-responsive reply from the chief of the Terrorism and Violent Crime Section--a curious and chilling person to assign such a project to, we thought...

There's more to this story, of course, including professional representatives of the most prominent "gun lobby" group discouraging members from signing the petition because we who promoted it were "wild-eyed extremists." The bottom line is, we were small fries. Bush support for the AWB notwithstanding (hell it was touted as a clever ploy to appeal to "moderates"), gun owners danced to the Lee Atwater tune--who else were they gonna vote for?

While paying for the privilege?

"Fund raising hype" ? I guess a cynical person would start to have some questions...

You'll note I haven't come up with any solutions yet. I'm still working on defining the problem, and have the rest of Mr. Licht's email to address.

More to come...

Publicola Pegs NSSF

Yeah, of course they'd sell us out in a heartbeat. They're an industry group, so their loyalties converging with our interests is simply a matter of coincidence.

April 19, 1775

BY the rude bridge that arched the flood, Their flag to April's breeze unfurled, Here once the embattled farmers stood, And fired the shot heard round the world. --Ralph Waldo Emerson

Publicola also reminds us of last year's post.

ANGEL UPDATE- 3/4/06 AM

I can't find any news accounts about this yet.

There's also no information yet on the Oakland County Jail Booking Register.

GunShowOnTheNet has a list of blogs reporting on this.

Publicola links to NRA's Michigan gun laws chart.

This is tentative: Pam Stegner of Preparedness Now asked me to be on her radio program Monday night to discuss this, but I have a professional commitment that evening. I got his OK, so she's making arrangements now with Gary Marbut to have him on--I'll advise when I know more, and IF this happens, I'll ask you to please spread the word to get as wide a listenership as we can.

Matt Bracken posted about this on Free Republic and The High Road (where moderator "Preacherman" apparently believes Rosa Parks deserved what she got). Some of the comments reflect apathy and excuses why the simple task of writing a letter is beyond what the posters are willing to do. This is illustrated by the following exchange on KABA:

Comment by: Tomahawk (3/4/2006)
Message sent. Hope it helps, though. You never know if some anti-judge gets angry for all the leters and decides to "send us a message". Wish we had some details, though. Hey Nicki, can you get us some info? I just signed my name on a letter to a judge and I don't really know what's going on; just blind faith in Angel, really.

Andy

Comment by: AvgJoe (3/4/2006)
I have no problem with helping out but have a few questions. The laws there are in place and known, why did he get busted. Is this a case that is being made to force a case into the federal courts.
It's real simple if I can't be armed in any state I don't go to that state and if I do and take a gun and get popped I have to deal with that.
There's a lot missing to this story and I think we should be let in on the facts before being asked to sign a letter.

Comment by: codrea4@adelphia.net (3/4/2006)
Avg Joe-if the laws in place say you must turn in your arms, will you obey? You can only avoid going places for so long-what will you do if the laws come to you?

There is simply no more information to be had at this time. Angel's friends are on top of this and making things known as we find them out.

Tomahawk said it well-sometimes, a little "blind faith"-based on known reputation-is needed. Joe, we are guests here in a house that Angel built. We all know him well enough to send a letter of support.

Those who want us disarmed are counting on our inability to cooperate on so simple and undemanding a task. If we won't even write a letter, what are the chances we will ever band together and really oppose them?

If anyone has time to dive into these boards and keep things on course, please do so.

Thanks to all who are supporting this by getting involved and spreading the word. Stay tuned.

See Also: Angel in Jail

Lacking in Delivery

Publicola has more on pizza chain disarmament.

Machine-Gun Toting Pirates Attack Ship

And the cruise ship got lucky--they were able to outrun their pursuers.

What about repelling attackers?

Sorry.

Per the International Maritime Organization:

Firearms

45 The carrying and use of firearms for personal protection or protection of a ship is strongly discouraged.

46 Carriage of arms on board ship may encourage attackers to carry firearms thereby escalating an already dangerous situation, and any firearms on board may themselves become an attractive target for an attacker. The use of firearms requires special training and aptitudes and the risk of accidents with firearms carried on board ship is great. In some jurisdictions, killing a national may have unforeseen consequences even for a person who believes he has acted in self defence.

I wrote about this obscene situation years ago in my GUNS & AMMO article "A Pirate's Life For Me."

UPDATE: Publicola also has something to say.

Well, Lady, You DID ASK For It...

Publicola makes mincemeat out of Meghan Blalock.

In the Shadow of 'Braveheart'

Publicola points us to a great site honoring William Wallace.

This guy David R. Ross appears to understand that he lives in a conquered and occupied country. I sent him the following:

As you know, Scotland is subject to virtually complete civilian disarmament imposed by its English rulers and abetted by Scottish MPs.

What is the position of your organization on the rights of freemen, including to bear arms in defense of self and country? Is it consistent with Wallace’s?

We'll see if he really gets it or not.

Prosecutor Steals Gun

Publicola tells a distressing and outrageous tale.

Oh, Duh.

"Just a thought," wrote Publicola, "but since we have B.A.G. Day & National Ammo Day shouldn't we promote a day to go to the range & use said guns & ammo? Perhaps June 23rd?"

I was tired and didn't click on the link he included in his email. Instead, I tried to find the significance of that date, and wrote back:

"I always observe June 23 to commemorate when Larry Doby retired from the Cleveland Indians and Harry Truman vetoed the Taft-Hartley Act. Oh, and June Carter Cash's birthday.

"Any particular 2A-related significance of the date I'm missing?"

"David," he patiently replied, "That was the day SCOTUS handed down Kelo. Nuff said? :)"

That sure beats "Look at the link I provided, you damned idiot," don't you think?

Lockyer 's Latest "In Your Face!" to Gun Owners

"A proposal to put a serial number on every handgun bullet passed a Senate committee Tuesday and law enforcement officials said they hoped the novel effort would spread to other states...

"'We'll solve a lot of crimes if this becomes law,' said Attorney General Bill Lockyer, who supported the bill...

"He acknowledged criminals could find ways around the law, but said milk, medicine, soda cans and most other things sold in stores have identification numbers.

"'Why not bullets?' he said."

Because, Bill. Those products have lot numbers on their containers.

But he's not stupid--he knows that. He also knows the average cud-chewer hearing that sound bite is so easily manipulated they will intuitively accept the proposal as "sensible," "reasonable," and "a good first step."

Back in 2002, I wrote to Randy Rossi of the California Department of Justice Firearms Division, asking him to square the state's position with then-US Attorney General John Ashcroft's statement that the Second Amendment is an individual right (and that's a story in manipulation itself).

After a series of emails and a month-and-a-half later, Rossi told me "The Attorney General felt that your request warranted a response directly from him."

That response is posted here. He says we have no individual right to keep and bear arms.

That means he and his fellow tyrants can just about do whatever they think they can get away with, and we can't do anything about it.

Naturally, "Lockyer...plans to seek the Democratic nomination for governor next year..."

And naturally, the Republicans will be able to offer us flawed goods, and gun owners will once again cave to the perceived "lesser of two evils."
----------------

UPDATE: Publicola has some good observations on this.