Tennessee Governor’s Veto Overridden

Well here’s some good news for anybody that’s been keeping track of the shenanigans that have been going on in Tennessee over the restraunt carry bill. Their House and Senate voted for legislation that would allow people with carry permits to carry their gun into establishments that served alcohol (they still can’t drink which is what most mass media sources forget to mention). Once the legislation hit the Governor’s desk it was vetoed. Well that veto has been overridden.

Good work people of Tennessee.

Drinking, It’ll Give You AIDS

Via No Agenda I learned that the World Health Organization has started a campaign against alcohol (because they research Prohibition in the United States and found that it worked so well). They have a page up titled Call for action to reduce the harmful use of alcohol. There are some real doozies on this page but my favorite is this:

Harmful drinking is also a major avoidable risk factor for noncommunicable diseases, in particular cardiovascular diseases, cirrhosis of the liver and various cancers. It is also associated with various infectious diseases like HIV/AIDS and TB, as well as road traffic accidents, violence and suicides.

Holy shit drinking can give you AIDS!

Making Recording the Police Illegal

There is a rather frightening article about the police and their love of cameras, so long as they’re the only ones who have them:

In response to a flood of Facebook and YouTube videos that depict police abuse, a new trend in law enforcement is gaining popularity. In at least three states, it is now illegal to record any on-duty police officer.

Even if the encounter involves you and may be necessary to your defense, and even if the recording is on a public street where no expectation of privacy exists.

More or less the same group of individuals who often say nobody should fear being under surveillance unless they’re doing something wrong doesn’t like being under surveillance. This seems to imply they know they are doing something wrong using their logic. The justification for these laws is also sickening:

The legal justification for arresting the “shooter” rests on existing wiretapping or eavesdropping laws, with statutes against obstructing law enforcement sometimes cited. Illinois, Massachusetts, and Maryland are among the 12 states in which all parties must consent for a recording to be legal unless, as with TV news crews, it is obvious to all that recording is underway. Since the police do not consent, the camera-wielder can be arrested. Most all-party-consent states also include an exception for recording in public places where “no expectation of privacy exists” (Illinois does not) but in practice this exception is not being recognized.

If you or I are out in public we can’t sue somebody for recording us specifically because there is no expectation of privacy under the law. Apparently since the police are better than us lowly surfs they are getting an exception in some states. This is a classic case of rules being applied differently depending on your status (in this case a police officer is a civilian but since they’re employees of the government the government is giving them special treatment). Don’t get me wrong I’m not saying all police officers are beating people on street corners but any officer supporting laws banning citizens from recording their actions while on duty makes it appear as though they have something to hide (by many officers’ own logic).

Society and technology are now at a point where a majority of people are carrying video recording devices in the form of cell phones. Coupled with the cellular Internet access we can share recorded videos with the entire world instantly. Even if the police confiscate your cell phone upon discovering you are recording them the video can already be uploaded to any number of websites making the confiscation meaningless.

This has been used quite a few times to record instances of police abuse which is later used to reprimand the recorded officers. So now the citizens can monitor the police force instead of only the police force being able to monitor the citizens. Some people join the police force because they want the authority and power that goes along with it. Of course these same people don’t want to responsibility and accountability that also goes along with it hence empowered citizens are a bad thing to them.

Banning the recording of police officers (or any public servant) while they are on duty is nothing more than government empowerment at the sacrifice of the peoples’ liberty (which is always the case). It’s one of the few methods we have at our disposal to play checks and balances with the police force. Otherwise it simply becomes a case of our word against theirs which almost always goes the way of the officer under question.

My First USPSA Match

Last night was my first USPSA match at Oakdale Gun Club. I managed to make it all the way through without getting disqualified which was my primary goal. My score was absolutely atrocious to say the least (I nailed one friendly target twice on the first stage, but I’m pretty sure he said something racist which makes it OK). In fact the scores are already posted and I have no shame so you can find them here. I shot Limited 10 and my score is under Christopher B. You’ll notice on stage four I hate a rating of 0% because of that racist friendly. I didn’t too bad with scoring points (with exception of state four which was my first) it’s just when that time thing was thrown in things didn’t look so good.

I made some observation which I hope to learn from. First adrenaline is a bitch. When it hits everything seems to be moving at a snails pace. Even when I thought I was going slow I was going far too fast. This is what really killed me (and that racist friendly target), I didn’t take it slow and easy even though I thought I did. So my not-pro tip for anybody starting the sport is this, take it dead slow and if you feel like you’re going slow you’re probably still going too fast.

My next observation was when the stage ends check the gun to make sure it’s unloaded. By this I mean really check it. One guy in my squad was disqualified because when the range officer said to drop the hammer his gun fired. When you’re done shooting that’s it you’re no longer being timed. Take a good several seconds to triple check the gun. In fact stick your finger into the chamber to ensure nothing is in there. I state this because the guy had a nice run and it was all for not due to the DQ.

Observation three was simple, have magazines. I brought seven magazines which I figured was going to be overkill but it was certainly nice not having to worry if I was reloading too often. A few guys in my squad only had two magazines and it sucked because they couldn’t perform reloads when moving from stage section to stage section which is kind of your time to get free reloads (meaning you’re not shooting and thus the time is being wasted unless you’re doing something). I had no troubles reloading on the move although I was rather slow at it. It almost always had the gun back in fighting condition by the time I arrived at the next set of targets so I wasn’t too worried.

And that’s what I learned. Either way it was a ton of fun and I can’t wait for next weeks match.

Read the Bills Act

Here’s a novel idea I stumbled upon yesterday. It’s a website proposing an idea for a bill that they title the Read the Bills Act. The idea of the bill is simple, require every bill and amendment to be read aloud before the Senate and House can vote on it:

  • Each bill, and every amendment, must be read in its entirety before a quorum in both the House and Senate.
  • Every member of the House and Senate must sign a sworn affidavit, under penalty of perjury, that he or she has attentively either personally read, or heard read, the complete bill to be voted on.
  • Every old law coming up for renewal under the sunset provisions must also be read according to the same rules that apply to new bills.
  • Every bill to be voted on must be published on the Internet at least 7 days before a vote, and Congress must give public notice of the date when a vote will be held on that bill.
  • Passage of a bill that does not abide by these provisions will render the measure null and void, and establish grounds for the law to be challenged in court.
  • Congress cannot waive these requirements.

Novel concept huh? Just imagine our representatives having to actually read bills and amendments before they pass them. Just thinking about how much this would slow down Congress makes me love this idea. Of course if introduced to the floor it would never pass since it would require those voting on it to do real work in the future (then again they may no actually read it and vote it through anyways, that would be irony).

So How’s That Global Warming Working Out

You know all those islands that are sinking due to rising sea levels caused by global warming climate change? Well they’re growing:

In recent times, the inhabitants of many low-lying Pacific islands have come to fear their homelands being wiped off the map because of rising sea levels.

But this study of 27 islands over the last 60 years suggests that most have remained stable, while some have actually grown.

I’m no expert but I believe growing is the exact opposite of sinking. Of course the people who are profiting off of believe in global warming are still spewing their bullshit:

But although these islands might not be submerged under the waves in the short-term, it does not mean they will be inhabitable in the long-term, and the scientists believe further rises in sea levels pose a significant danger to the livelihoods of people living in Tuvalu, Kiribati and the Federated States of Micronesia.

One scientist in Kiribati said that people should not be lulled into thinking that inundation and coastal erosion were not a major threat.

So the “rising sea levels” aren’t actually sinking these islands yet these people are saying the inhabitants of said islands should be worried because “rising sea levels” are going to destroy them? What the fuck?

Weapons Heading to Mexico Seized

Apparently a large quantity of weapons has been seized on it’s way to Mexico:

Texas police say they acted on a tip-off and stopped a truck. Inside, they found 147 assault rifles, 53 bayonets and more than 10,000 rounds of ammunition they believe were heading across the border to Mexico.

Oh no not bayonets! You could seriously poke somebody’s eye out with one of those. I’m sure the anti-gunners are going to be all over this in about five minutes. Of course they will harp how this is proof we need to ban “assault weapons” here although I’m betting most of those seized weapons were fully automatic and thus already heavily restricted (if produced before 1986, otherwise illegal).

Here’s my favorite part though:

President Obama has said that US demand for drugs has contributed to the violence in Mexico, and that the flow of guns from the US to Mexico must be stopped.

I have a better solution. Instead of wasting our money and resources protecting another country how about we just dump the prohibition on currently illegal drugs? The government can tax them thus creating a revenue source, our prisons will no longer be overflowing with people who harmed nobody besides themselves, and best of all it will eliminate the power of the drug cartels overnight. Seriously this war on drugs has accomplished nothing besides putting many American citizens in prison for victimless crimes and empowering the drug cartels.

Inexperience and Government

Yesterday I posted a good article that related to Minnesota’s own “gun show loophole” that isn’t a loophole. Something has been eating at me about that article, namely this:

Paymar has never fired a handgun, nor has he ever attended a gun show. He was moved to act, he says, after seeing a YouTube clip. In it, Colin Goddard, a Virginia Tech massacre survivor who was shot four times, attends gun shows and successfully buys firearms without undergoing a background check or even being asked to show identification.

I touched on it briefly in yesterday’s post but it’s something that has bugged me about government forever. Why do we find it acceptable to allow people with no knowledge or experience in a field to legislate that field? Paymar isn’t the only example. Ted “Series of Tubes” Stevens we put in charge of Internet regulation even though he obviously had no knowledge in the field.

This seems to be a common thing with government. We find the most incompetent people and let them be in charge of something. This kind of incompetence doesn’t fly anywhere else but government (normally). Generally if you’re put in charge of something at a company it’s because you portrayed some kind of competence in the area of concern. If you’re not competent you are eventually fired.

But here Paymar has never been to a gun show in his life yet he feels justified in creating legislation that would affect gun shows. Now his bill was shot down in committee thankfully but he’s vowed to reintroduce the bill at a later time. This raises the question, what the Hell is he thinking? He can’t claim it’s to get voter favor since the bill doesn’t seem to have much traction here in Minnesota. The only people who really seem to care are us pro-gunners and the anti-gunners who generally don’t know what they’re talking about.

We shouldn’t stand for this. Instead we should demand that in order to legislate something the person writing the law much either have direct experience with the topic or have hired independent consultants who have said experience.

Testing Minnesota’s “Gun Show Loophole”

A certain representative with the last name Paymar has been trying to pass a law here in Minnesota to close the “gun show loophole.” Of course if you’ve been reading this site for any amount of time you know it’s not a “gun show loophole” but private property right.

Well a journalist by the name of Matt Snyders decided to test the “gun show loophole.” What he discovered is something us gun owners have known forever, buying a gun from a dealer regardless of venue requires paperwork, a NICS check, and here in Minnesota a permit to purchase or carry for certain firearms. First let’s bring up Mr. Paymar and his qualifications on firearms:

Paymar has never fired a handgun, nor has he ever attended a gun show. He was moved to act, he says, after seeing a YouTube clip. In it, Colin Goddard, a Virginia Tech massacre survivor who was shot four times, attends gun shows and successfully buys firearms without undergoing a background check or even being asked to show identification.

He’s never fired a handgun nor attended a gun show? In politics that makes him the most qualified person to write a law restricting both. In the real world that makes him uneducated and whole incapable of writing legislation that affects either.

He also brings up the Virginia Tech shooter who legally purchased both of his guns not a gun shows, but through a dealer. That means the Virginia Tech shooter when through the paperwork and background checks to obtain his weapons. In any logical argument that would make the example of Virginia Tech irrelevant and inadmissible. But as we all know anti-gunners don’t use logic instead opting for hysteria.

Anyways Mr. Snyder put forth the following mission for himself:

So I decided to try to buy a gun. To hear the Citizens for a Safer Minnesota tell it, this would be an easy task. I didn’t have a permit, but surely these gun merchants would insist I purchase their wares, federal red tape be damned. I might even enjoy it.

Obviously he should have no problem here. After all according to the anti-gunners you can just walk into any gun show and walk out with fifty machine guns without raising any eyebrows. But the truth, as usual, is at odds with what the anti-gunners think. The first gun show Mr. Snyder attended yielded several things. First it wasn’t just guns for sale:

Over at a literature table, dozens of books offer a history of killing machines from the 18th century to the present. Nazi-themed tomes, for whatever reason, seem particularly popular.

This is where the anti-gunners claim those of us in the shooting culture are Nazis. The truth is far less insidious though. Many gunnies are also big history buffs. They don’t collect World War II memorabilia because they think Hitler was right, they collect it because it’s a part of history that should never be forgot. One of my uncles actually collects many items from World War II from flags to helmets. He’s not a Nazi, racist, or bigot. He’s a history buff and owing a piece of history is a big deal for him. It’s no different than owning a jacket worn by a famous movie star except the memorabilia from various wars actually has meaning since good men shed blood over it. So how did Mr. Snyder fair on the gun front? Well:

Before any transaction is finalized, all licensed vendors must place a call to the National Instant Criminal Background Checks System, an all-day hotline that every diligent vendor has on speed dial and which is referred to as “Nicks” (NICS). If the call turns up any felonies, instances of domestic abuse, or mental illness, the sale is canceled.

“This is not the venue for selling machine guns,” Tim adds as he nods respectfully to a passing browser. “Those are hard to come by. Only hard collectors get into them. Very expensive, plus there’s a $200 federal transfer tacked on for every sale.”

That’s a dirty little secret the anti-gunners never tell you. All transactions through dealers requires a NICS check and an ATF form filled out while machine guns are heavily regulated. So that only leaves sales between individuals:

About 12 minutes later, a prim man wades through the booths, black Romanian WASR-10 AK-47 slung over his shoulder. A white sheet of paper taped to its glistening black barrel announces its price: $500 or best offer.

“I want my baby to go to a good home,” he says, eyeing me up and down.

I can tell by his squinting, sun-weathered eyes that he doesn’t mean mine.

And as Mr. Snyder found out most individuals are picky where their property winds up.

That’s one failure so Mr. Snyder attends another gun show. First of all he finds out unlike what the anti-gunners claim gunners are not racists:

When three black men enter the show at around 1 p.m., however, no one pays them much mind. Asked about their experience here, they seem more taken aback by the question’s presumption than the surroundings.

“I’ve been to three gun shows, and I’ve never had a problem,” says Grant, turning to his friends for corroboration. They nod. They’re not here to purchase, Grant adds. For many, gun and knife shows are the male equivalent of window-shopping for shoes.

And later Mr. Snyder again attempts to obtain a firearm at a gun show without a permit or background check:

“You have your permit to purchase, right?” asks the vendor.

The answer to the question was an unfortunate no.

“No permit to purchase?” he said. “You’re shit outta luck, my friend.”

This “loophole” is starting to look more like a brick wall. How does Mr. Snyder fair at the next show? Surprisingly just as well as the other two mentioned shows:

But three consecutive attempts yield reactions ranging from apologetic to annoyed.

“No permit to purchase, no sale,” snaps a looming, pear-shaped man as his plump hands hastily repackage what would otherwise be a sale. “Wasting your time here without one. Good day.”

The vendors here are sticklers on every provision, clause, subsection, and footnote on the books. In one case, a clean-cut seller in a charcoal-black Harley Davidson shirt conversed curtly with two men, one who appeared to be in his 70s, the other fiftyish. The vendor refuses to sell more than two handguns to the befuddled duo.

“Them’s the rules,” says the vendor. “I don’t give a fuck, but them’s the rules.”

“Well, in that case, I’ll just buy the Colt and sell it to him,” replies the elder of the two.

“Now that’s a straw buy,” retorted the vendor. “One hundred percent illegal. I don’t give a fuck, but if I were to sell ya that after you just told me that, I’d lose my license!”

“I’ve known him since he was this high,” says the man, holding his liver-spotted hand four feet off the floor.

“I understand that, but it’s worse than dealing with the IRS if I sold ya two!”

Six days, three gun shows, and 19 attempts to buy handguns sans permit had yielded zero sales.

That’s right six days, three gun shows, 19 attempts to purchase, and zero guns. Some loophole that turned out to be. So much for that “gun show loophole” that allows anybody to purchase untold numbers of guns without any regulation.

So the next time you hear a blow hard anti-gunners claiming anything about firearms go talk to somebody in the shooting community. We have experience and knowledge in the firearm fields, we know the laws, and we will give you the truth instead of the hysteria.