Glenn Reynolds:

SO THEY’RE BATTING .500: Sex Toys Still Illegal in Texas and Alabama; Guns OK.

Here in Tennessee, they’re both legal: we don’t care how you choose to fill your hand.

Offered without commentary, which is unusual for ol’ Murdoc.

Jeff Soyer:

In a poll of Vermonters that asked only one question, “Would you favor or oppose the state passing new legislation to restrict sale or ownership of guns?” the surprising (to many) result was a majority of them do favor more restrictions.

It’s surprising because traditionally, even Democrats in the state are pro-Second Amendment and have eschewed gun control laws. The fact is, of course, that liberal flatlanders from out-of-state continue to move here and try to ram their leftist, socialist agenda down the throat of natives.

Adds a commenter:

This poll announcement follows by two weeks the WCAX two part scare series on the increase in ‘gun crime’ in the state.

West Hazleton woman scares off intruder

A burglar fled a West Hazleton home when a resident got a pistol and took a shot at the man Tuesday evening, borough police said.

The incident happened at an East Broad Street home just before 7 p.m., according to the victim, Terri Gavinski. She and her husband, Dave Gavinski, who was at work when the home invasion occurred, talked about her frightening experience Tuesday night.

Terri Gavinski she was relaxing watching TV, when she heard a noise and saw the figure of a man standing at the edge of the hallway leading into her living room.

She said to the man, “Please don’t hurt me.” He responsed by referring to her in a derogatory manner.

She managed to get hold of one of her husband’s guns and get a shot off, scaring the intruder into dropping his loot and making a run for it.

He should have taken the time to remind her that, unless she has a permit, it was illegal to carry that weapon concealed beneath her housecoat.

Via CGSDB.

I believe that it is not legal in California, at least not with high capacity magazines, but who doesn’t love the 40mm Bofors? Video at Military.com’s Shock and Awe.

Boston’s ‘Safe Homes’ Initiative Isn’t About Safety

When the government wants to take away our rights, it conceals its intent with the assurance that it simply wants to make us safe. The Boston Police Department’s “Safe Homes Initiative” sounds unobjectionable — who doesn’t want a safe home? — but it’s important to look behind the marketing to understand what’s really motivating the Boston police.

Bob Barr:

On the surface —- as with virtually all government actions diminishing liberty —- the initiative appears benign. The program is “designed” to help parents who have so little control over their children that they cannot —- or do not want to —- search their rooms to discover if their young charges are hiding firearms in their homes. Boston’s police chief, Edward Davis, graciously has agreed to fill this parental void by sending teams of officers to the homes of parents with children the police or other “community members” believe might be harboring hidden firearms. The “search teams” would then ask the parent or “other responsible adult” (whomever that might be) at the home for consent to search for guns.

Once they have permission for a warrantless search, all is fair game. Playing the “be afraid of guns” card for hopes of a bonus pay-off, it looks like to me.

Read both links. When the government does something for your “safety,” an initial reaction of skepticism is probably best.

Via Instapundit.

Turnpike toll takers’ guns collected

Gun-toting toll collectors have been stripped of their sidearms by Mass Pike brass after secretly carrying them for decades without formal training, the Herald has learned.

“I didn’t want to have a wild west show out there,” said Massachusetts Turnpike Authority Executive Director Alan LeBovidge, who ordered the practice stopped. “I could find nothing to show that the employees had state police training that would make them qualified to carry guns.”

What? Is it complete blind luck that prevented any “wild west shows” for “decades”?

Typical gun control fear-mongering: Wring your hands about how bad things could get when years and years of practical real-world experience shows the exact opposite is true.

Via John Lott.

From Anne Denogean in the Tuscon Citizen: If these bills pass, I’m buying bulletproof vest:

Not content merely to have people waving around guns on campuses and highways across the state, another conservative legislator introduced a bill to allow people to carry firearms into restaurants that serve liquor…

Under the bill, the person carrying a weapon couldn’t drink.

That’s sensible. But would you want to be the waitress telling an irate customer who’s packing he can’t have a beer?

Because CCW permit holders have such a long and documented history of shooting people up for little or no reason, I guess.

Yeah. Right.

Noticed this bit in an anti-gun editorial entitled Response to Virginia Tech has not gone far enough

It is disturbing that after repeated incidents of campus carnage dating back to Columbine in 1999 and earlier, organizations continue to block effective gun-control legislation. Even worse, some have proposed allowing more guns on campuses, under the Wild West rationale that if every student and teacher is armed, they can defend themselves against a lone, irrational shooter.

Bills such as one before the Alabama legislature would allow guns on state college campuses if the students are properly licensed — as was Kazmierczak.

The shooter was licensed to carry his weapons? In Illinois? Are they sure about that?

Looks like:

A) Cool woodworking project for Boy Scouts or something
B) No fun to reload.