Archive for the ‘Guns’ Category
Heller Affirmed!
From the opinion:
The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.
[...]
The Amendment’s prefatory clause announces a purpose, but does not limit or expand the scope of the second part, the operative clause. The operative clause’s text and history demonstrate that it connotes an individual right to keep and bear arms.
Woot. This is Big News(tm). Big enough, in fact, for CNN to run a front-page story on their website. The BBC has the story front-page on their international news page.
The Brady Campaign site is amusing yet sad…the decision is reached, and they immediately start begging for money. The NRA, on the other hand, is business as usual, and has a one-line mention of the ruling in the “NRA Top News Stories” category on their home page.
I’m still reading the opinion, so I’ll post more later when I’ve read it. Other blogs I read (see the blogroll on the right) have a considerable amount of material on the subject, so check them out!
I’d have a celebratory day at the range, but I’m in San Francisco after a multi-week vacation to Europe so all my guns are in the safe in Arizona. I may have to talk to some of my California friends to see about celebrating.
Europe Update
I’m in Europe (Paris, to be specific), and have some internet access courtesy of the hotel where I’m staying.
Whilst in London, I observed the Changing of the Guard ceremony in Buckingham Palace and noticed something quite interesting: Singapore had a contingent of guards at the palace (they were relieved by what appeared to be members of the British Royal Air Force). The Singaporean troops were carrying chrome- or nickel-plated M16A1s, which struck me as a bit weird.
Does anyone know if these rifles could be functional if so plated, or if they’re only suitable for parades and whatnot?
Sixty-Four Years
To all those who waded ashore, parachuted, or otherwise arrived in Normandy, thank you.
In a week or two, I will be visiting the cemeteries and paying my respects to those brave soldiers who died there.
Guns and the Internet
One of the comments on this article stood out at me, and necessitated a reply.
The comment was:
Nut in Green Bay
He sold the guns used in two recent massares, over the net. He wants to make up for it by selling guns at cost so everyone can protect themselves.
Believe it or not, they featured him on the local news here with no comment, stating his case. As if he were a hero.
Mind boggling. There is no limit to the insanity of humans or the gullibility of mass media.
Did the bushies make it legal to sell guns over the net? How is this possible?
-amazingdrx
With very few exceptions (e.g. antique firearms), a non-FFL-holding individual cannot directly buy guns from the internet and have them shipped directly to them. This has been the case since 1968, and has not changed since then. Bush and his supporters have changed nothing.
One may purchase a gun from an online vendor like TGSCOM or a private seller on an auction site like GunBroker and have it shipped to their local Federal Firearms License holder (i.e. a gun shop). Next, the purchaser must go through the normal procedure of buying the gun from the dealer: filling out an ATF Form 4473 and undergoing a NICS background check. All state and local laws must also be obeyed.
There are several advantages to buying guns online:
- Oftentimes online vendors have better pricing than a local shop.
- Online vendors can often stock a larger variety of guns, often including unusual or uncommon guns, than a local shop.
- Interstate purchases do not incur the cost of state sales tax.
Even taking into account the cost of shipping and the local dealer’s transfer fees, the lack of sales tax and better online pricing often results in a net savings of money for the purchaser.
In practice, this is absolutely no different than having the local gun shop special order a gun from a distributor, except that the buyer (rather than the dealer) initiates the transaction and has a greater choice of vendors than does the local gun shop.
Eric Thompson (proprietor of TGSCOM, who runs GunsAtCost.com and other online gun shops) did not sell the guns used in two recent massacres. Rather, he sold a single gun to one of the shooters, and some non-regulated parts (magazines) to another. He complied with all applicable laws: once paid, he shipped the gun to the buyer’s local FFL. The dealer complied with the law, ensured the appropriate forms and background check were completed, and sold the gun to the buyer. Everything was conducted in accordance with the law. The fact that the buyer later used the gun to commit a heinous crime is not the fault of Mr. Thompson or the local dealer. The fault lies solely with the murderer.
Mr. Thompson’s offer to sell guns at cost so that law-abiding citizens can afford to protect themselves is an honorable act, and I applaud him for doing so.
Reuters Reports On Ammo Prices
Article here.
While I dislike rising ammo prices, I’m pleasantly surprised to see a mainstream news organization reporting on the increasing cost of ammo in a neutral fashion, just like they would report on bread, milk, gasoline, etc.
Brady Campaign Newsletter
I got an email from the Brady Campaign containing the following bit of news:
Representative Mike Castle (R-DE) has introduced legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives (H.R. 96) that will require Brady background checks at gun shows, and stop criminals and other dangerous people from exploiting these events to buy and sell guns.
Guess who they consider “other dangerous people” to be? Probably folks like you and me — ordinary people who own guns.
FFL holders (e.g. gun dealers) need to conduct the NICS check and have purchasers fill out a Form 4473 regardless of where the transaction takes place. The rules for dealers are no different at gun shows than they are at their own property — this law would only affect private citizens wishing to buy or sell guns at gun shows by requiring that they transfer their guns through an FFL holder.
The law would even effect private sales not occurring at gun shows — it would require that any private sale occur at the seller’s private residence, rather than at the buyer’s residence or any other location.
Also, the bill would make it illegal to hold gun shows (”special firearms events”) without notifying the US Attorney General, in writing, at least 30 days ahead of time “of the date, time, duration, and location of the special firearms event, and the special firearms event vendors planning to participate”.
Like the Brady Campaign, I urge you to contact your legislators…except that I urge you to oppose this bill.
See GovTrack or THOMAS for more details on the bill.
Ruger 10/22 Magazine Maintenance
A while back, I made a video describing how to maintain Ruger 10/22 magazines. Here it is:
There is also a website that accompanies it, and provides additional detail and photographs. If you have any more questions, or seek clarification, feel free to ask.
Update: Laughing at my hair is strictly forbidden.
Banning Ski Masks to Stop Bank Robbery
Would banning ski masks help stop bank robbery?
Of course not! That’d be absurd. Ski masks don’t cause bank robbery.
Similarly, guns don’t cause crime. In fact, they can be used to defend against crime*! Heck, I can think of a whole heck of a lot more fun, useful, productive, and beneficial things that one can do with a gun than one can do with a ski mask. Neither ski masks nor guns cause any harm by themselves — they’re simply inanimate objects.
Why, then, are there so many people who seem to think that restricting (or banning) guns will help reduce crime? It doesn’t make any sense!
* Something that ski masks can’t do. At least not the last time I checked.
Full Auto Fun
In 2007, my Class III dealer friend Mike and his Class II manufacturer friend Rob went out for a day of full-auto fun in the National Forest.
While the video is over a year old, I still think it’s fun. Unfortunately, it contributes to my indecision over which machine gun to buy, as all of the guns pictured therein (M16s and Uzis) are incredibly fun to shoot. Alas, the full-auto switch for the Glock (which Rob makes for a living) is a post-86 machine gun, and thus not legal for me to buy. Curses!
For reference, I’m the guy in blue jeans, the green Peace Through Superior Firepower shirt, and the baseball hat. And yes, I’m left-handed.
Hunting in Arizona
I’ve been a shooter for about 5 years now (give me a break — I grew up in the SF Bay Area!), and so far have only shot targets of various kinds.
I’ve been wanting to learn how to hunt for some time, but have no experience whatsoever. Somehow, hunting doesn’t seem like the sort of thing that one merely takes the state-mandated Hunter Education course for. Rather, it seems like it’s the sort of thing that’s taught by some sort of mentor.
The only hunting-related equipment I have at present are boots and rifles (the two most suitable ones would probably be my Remington 700 and Marlin 336, in .30-06 and .30-30 respectively). My Mossberg 500 shotgun is in a “riotgun” configuration, and so probably wouldn’t be suitable.
Is there anyone in the Tucson or Phoenix metro areas who might be willing to instruct and accompany me?
If so, I’d appreciate it you could contact me.