Arms and the Law

The Government Accounting Office just issued this report, concluding that in Fiscal Year 2017, there were over 112,000 "denials," of which ATF investigated about 1,200. It referred about 50 for prosecution, and the Department of Justice prosecuted a whole 12. The Point of Contact states didn't do much better. "Troopers in Oregon and Virginia commented that in their experience, there can be some degree of inaccuracy in the criminal records in their state. For example, they said that arrests and prosecution results may not be accurately reflected in the criminal history of the denied person. When the trooper checks the actual record, it is sometimes discovered that the person is not prohibited. A Virginia trooper said this is especially common for juvenile convictions."

I recall that John Lott looked into this issue and concluded that a large proportion of denials were in error, a large proportion of the remainder involved things no one would think worth prosecuting ... a denial due to an old non-violent conviction, that manner of thing.

She appears to have some trouble telling the truth.

But at least she bravely pledged never to accept NRA donations, when the NRA had and has no intention of donating to her....

Maybe he just poaches?

Story here.

"Recorded machete attacks have increased fivefold in the past three years, to the point that police now deal with an average of 15 incidents involving the broad, sword-like blades each day.

Incredibly strict firearm controls appear to be doing little to stem soaring rates of gun crime, too, with London seeing a 44 per cent rise since 2014 -- but even though this is occuring despite Britain boasting some of the toughest anti-gun laws in the world, politicians hope increasing restrictions on knife sales can help tackle blade crime.

With calls to ban kitchen knife sales on the basis that domestic food preparation does not require chef-sharp tools and stores voluntarily taking knives off the shelves, the United Kingdom already takes a much stricter approach to sharp objects than most other Western nations, with authorities earlier this year arresting a man for carrying a potato peeler in a public place "without reasonable excuse"."

They claim a lack of 2A infringement is a violation of human rights. One of my good friends was the late Mark Benenson, Krag collector, NRA Lifer, and former president of Amnesty International's US branch. He told me how, when AI discovered he was a gun collector and NRA member, they tried to create a rival AI branch so they could affiliate with it and rid themselves of this terrible gun right supporter.

He also mentioned that AI had branched into attacking human slavery, and he had opposed it, on the grounds that there already were organizations doing that, they were experienced and doing a good job, and AI entering the field would simply drain away their funding support. AI went that way anyway. I wonder if this might not be a replay? "We're antigun, will you (major foundations, etc.) give us some cash?"

This is real performance art: sociology professor shoots self in arm to protest Trump.

(And gets charged with carrying a concealed weapon, carrying one on school property....)

Hat tip to Clayton Cramer...

Ruling here. California had a ban on gun shops having images of guns visible from the outside. A shop can have the word "gun" visible but not a picture of one. It was a strange rule, first found in the Uniform Firearms Act of the 1920s, as I recall. (I think it also required any firearms sold to be "securely wrapped" before they left the premises). The reason was never clear to me -- perhaps the thought that people would be upset if they thought that a gun store was selling guns?

The court struck down the provision on First Amendment grounds. The best rationale the state could come up with was that seeing a picture of a gun might cause suicides. Not even close to the argument required to regulate commercial speech....

Right here.

I've uploaded a copy here.

Brendan Kirby has a key thought. Kavanaugh will be one vote out of nine. If indeed he's "outside the judicial mainstream" he'll lose 8-1 every time. His vote can only have an impact if four other Justices agree, and any view that is held by four sitting Supreme Court Justices cannot be described as "outside the judicial mainstream." So which is it?

I like his style. He explains that in Florida, you do not want to threaten to shoot an Uber driver because he might have a concealed carry license and be fresh from the police academy as well. "This is justifiable homicide all day long."

If anyone has purchased my new book on mass shootings and why gun control is useless against them, would you kindly leave a review on its Amazon page?

Clayton Cramer has the story: Winter Haven, FL Uber driver picks up a lady, who is coming away from an argument with her boyfriend. Boyfriend cuts in front of the Uber, draws pistol, approaches uttering threats. Uber driver gives him a warning shot to center of mass.

(And yet again, the story writers confuses "stand your ground" with ordinary self-defense standards).

Ouch!

Tulsa man overpowers and hogties burglar, calls police and leaves for work.

Story here, with a link to the actual ruling.

American Federation of Teachers rejects proposal to give guns to teachers.

Teaching assistant reassigned after she announces arms bearing is limited to a 3x3 square in her classroom. "This zone also does not include a desk, because desks are reserved for students who respect the personal and psychological safety of their classmates and instructor."

against some flimsy legal claims.

Dave Workman has the story.

Ooops. It was a loaner pistol from her then law enforcement agency. It looks as if she took six or seven months to notice and report it.

"In May, Giffords and her "gun safety organization" endorsed Valdez's candidacy, claiming the former sheriff had led the charge in preventing guns from "ending up in the wrong hands" during her tenure in office."