Recently in Legal Category
The Criminal Justice System of Gotham City
Not coincidentally, the Gotham City of the two most recent Batman films is based on Chicago, not New York City. This makes some sense, because Chicago residents are severely restricted in their methods of self defense. Masked vigilantes might be the only answer.
'They will honor you because you are doing their work'
How black Baltimore drug dealers are using white supremacist legal theories to confound the Feds
The "Flesh-and-Blood Defense":
As officers of the court, all defense lawyers are really on the government's side, having sworn an oath to uphold a vast, century-old conspiracy to conceal the fact that most aspects of the federal government are illegitimate, including the courts, which have no constitutional authority to bring people to trial. The defendants also believed that a legal distinction could be drawn between their name as written on their indictment and their true identity as a "flesh and blood man."
Don't forget the incidents of gun deaths in Baltimore.
Ryan Narcisco, a 20-year old mall clerk, might go to jail for keeping a BB gun in his car.
Mandatory 3-year sentence, no parole, for unlawful possession of a firearm.
According to a commenter, the NJ definition of a firearm
shall also include, without limitation, any firearm which is in the nature of an air gun, spring gun or pistol or other weapon of a similar nature in which the propelling force is a spring, elastic band, carbon dioxide, compressed or other gas, or vapor, air or compressed air, or is ignited by compressed air, and ejecting a bullet or missile smaller than three-eighths of an inch in diameter, with sufficient force to injure a person.
Via Instapundit.
Although an individual now has a constitutional right to own guns, that new right is not unlimited, wrote Scalia, a hunter. [emphasis Murdoc's]
Via the Free Constitution Blog.
As I noted earlier:
No matter which way the SCOTUS goes, their decision will define what the 2nd Amendment has been all along.
It's not that they're redefining it, and that this afternoon it will mean something different than it did yesterday. It's that they're going to decide what it's meant since the day it was written.
This is not a "new right." People are going to tell the story that way, but they're either mistaken or lying.
Here are the quick points I posted over at Murdoc Online:
- The official position of the United States of America is that the keeping and bearing of arms is an individual right.
- The 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution does not grant that right to citizens.
- It guarantees that government cannot infringe upon that right, the right that Just Is.
- The Court's ruling does not change what the 2nd Amendment means. It doesn't mean something different this afternoon than it meant yesterday. It has always meant it. Some people and some laws were just wrong when they claimed otherwise.
- This isn't the end of the gun control battle.
- But, to coin a phrase, it might be the end of the beginning of the gun control battle.
- Future debates will center on thing like the definition of "arms" and what "shall not be infringed" and "keep and bear" mean.
Man gets 100 days for shooting doe antelope
CHEYENNE - A magistrate in Sweetwater County has sentenced a Tennessee man to serve 100 days in jail and pay $6,000 in fines and restitution for shooting a doe antelope several times with a semiautomatic rifle last weekend. Officials say the case is only the latest in a disturbing pattern of out-of-state energy workers wantonly killing Wyoming wildlife.
Tori Stephen Bowman, 23, of Cookeville, Tenn., pleaded guilty Monday to wanton destruction of a big-game animal.
In addition to imposing the jail time, fines and restitution, Magistrate Stephen K. Palmer forfeited Bowman's rifle to the state and revoked his hunting and fishing privileges for five years. Palmer also fined Bowman $350 on his guilty plea to a misdemeanor marijuana possession charge, court records show.
Forfeiture of a firearm and a $6,000 fine seems pretty steep, never mind the 100 days in jail. Then again, shooting a lactating antelope doe for the hell of it is ridiculous beyond reason, and it's tough to really argue hard with any sentence.
The rifle was an AK.
Via GunPro.net.
We'll learn of the Supreme Court ruling today.
I predict a solid win for the "individual right"-view. Either way, it's going to be an historic day in the history of the gun control debate.
UPDATE (9:50am): Heller poll at Uncle's.
I don't know how to answer, because A) I didn't buy an booze or cigars, good or otherwise, and B) guns and ammo have been buried in the back yard for months.
Also:
I think we'll probably be spending the next several decades arguing over exactly what Shall not be infringed means.
Absolutely we will.
Finally, he notes that both sides are going to be claiming victory, whatever the decision is. He's right, but I think most folks (at least those who aren't 100% invested in the losing side) will know that BS for what it is.
The coworker of mine who has said "What? You mean the National Guard?" every single time someone brings up the 2nd Amendment will have lost all of his previous arguments if the "individual right" view carries the day. He won't admit it, of course, and will adopt new tactics. But years of what he claimed was an argument-winning point will have evaporated in one morning.
A last thing to keep in mind is this: No matter which way the SCOTUS goes, their decision will define what the 2nd Amendment has been all along.
It's not that they're redefining it, and that this afternoon it will mean something different than it did yesterday. It's that they're going to decide what it's meant since the day it was written.
Ten minutes to go.
Comment on the Jersey gun ration:
OK, so NJ "limits" you to one gun a month. Then SCOTUS rules gun ownership is an individual right. So everyone is now ENTITLED to one gun a month.
Not sure if that would stand up to scrutiny. But it sounds good to me.
They apparently vote today on NJ Assembly bill A-339, which would limit purchases to one handgun in any 30-day period.
Sebastian outlines the current New Jersey requirements, which are more than a bit burdensome and time-consuming already, and notes:
If requiring this for each and every handgun purchase has not been sufficient to stop criminal trafficking of firearms, it's beyond insane to believe that adding one more requirement, one that rations the number of purchase permits police may issue, is going to be what does the trick.
This, of course, is not really "beyond insane." Or, rather, it is certainly "beyond insane" to believe that, but that isn't what those behind the bill really believe. Gun control activists virtually all have a desired end state of "no guns for anyone anywhere." Some of them will, maybe, deny it, but most of the leadership of the various is pretty clear about their methodology. They intend to nickel and dime their way to total bans.
They get what they can get when they can get it. Require a license. Require an additional purchase permit. Require this. Require that. Limit the number of guns you can buy. Limit the number of days a week guns can be sold. Limit the locations of gun stores. Limit the places you can carry them. Anything at all to chip away at the freedom to buy and own firearms.
So while it's beyond insane to expect a one gun a month limit to have an impact on crime, it's not beyond insane to use such a limit to further restrict lawful gun owners.
The criminal misuse of any lawful product is not a function of the number of units sold to honest citizens; it's a function of how effectively society deals with those who misuse them.
Whoa, there, buddy! Not only allow people who don't break the law to purchase legal products, but ALSO punish lawbreakers?
Now we're talking crazy.
UPDATE: It passed 47-28.
Joe Huffman on the Seattle buffoonery:
The Seattle PI had an opinion piece where they said:
Mayor Greg Nickels' plan to forbid guns on a host of city properties is a measured response to the gunshot injuries to two people at Seattle Center during the Folklife celebration.
...
The city would ask people legally carrying concealed weapons not to bring the guns into city parks, community centers and other city facilities. Anyone discovered with a gun could be asked to leave under trespassing statutes.
...
He represents his city well on the issue.
In the comments it's pointed out that the order is illegal under Washington state law. Huffman responds:
But it's expensive and time consuming for people to fight it.
A handgun was found in actor Dennis Farina's bag at LAX. He was flying to Chicago.
Handgun. Los Angeles. Chicago.
One of those is not like the rest.
Thank goodness no felony charges.
As Uncle says: Like you and me, only better
Incidentally, calling Farina a "star" of Saving Private Ryan is a bit of stretch...I'm not anti-Farina. But give me a break.
In an article about the lawsuit against Jay Wallace, owner of a sporting goods store in Smyrna, Georgia:
Since Bloomberg became mayor in 2002, every gun homicide in the city has been committed with an illegal gun, police say.
But it's too difficult to go after and get the ones with illegal guns. Much easier to control those who follow the law.
I don't know many specifics about this particular case, but the charge is basically that the shop's practices allow straw purchases.
Well, either the shop complies with the law or it doesn't. Should be simple enough to determine.
And, as Caleb points out, what a "straw purchase" is gets constantly misrepresented.
