SIDEBAR
»
S
I
D
E
B
A
R
«
Judge admits the obvious
Mar 5th, 2012 by Ken Hagler

Mary­land Hand­gun Per­mit Restric­tions Found Uncon­sti­tu­tion­al by Fed­er­al Judge.

Hap­py
details from the Asso­ci­at­ed Press
:

Maryland’s require­ment that res­i­dents show a “good and
sub­stan­tial rea­son” to get a hand­gun per­mit is uncon­sti­tu­tion­al,
accord­ing to a fed­er­al judge’s opin­ion filed Mon­day.

States can chan­nel the way their res­i­dents exer­cise their Sec­ond
Amend­ment right to bear arms, but because Maryland’s goal was to
min­i­mize the num­ber of firearms car­ried out­side homes by lim­it­ing
the priv­i­lege to those who could demon­strate “good rea­son,” it had
turned into a rationing sys­tem, infring­ing upon res­i­dents’ rights,
U.S. Dis­trict Judge Ben­son Everett Legg wrote.

A cit­i­zen may not be required to offer a ‘good and sub­stan­tial
rea­son’ why he should be per­mit­ted to exer­cise his rights,” he
wrote. “The right’s exis­tence is all the rea­son he needs.”

Plain­tiff Ray­mond Wool­lard obtained a hand­gun per­mit after
fight­ing with an intrud­er in his Hamp­stead home in 2002, but was
denied a renewal in 2009 because he could not show he had been
sub­ject to “threats occur­ring beyond his res­i­dence.”
Wool­lard appealed, but was reject­ed by the review board, which
found he hadn’t demon­strat­ed a “good and sub­stan­tial rea­son” to
car­ry a hand­gun as a rea­son­able pre­cau­tion. The suit filed in 2010
claimed that Mary­land didn’t have a rea­son to deny the renewal and
wrong­ly put the bur­den on Wool­lard to show why he still need­ed to
car­ry a gun.

The Sec­ond Amend­ment Foun­da­tion
spon­sored the suit, and Woollard’s lawyer was Sec­ond Amend­ment
vin­di­ca­tor Alan Gura, who also won the 
Heller
and 
McDon­ald
suits at the Supre­me Court that estab­lished our right to own
com­mon­ly used weapons for self-defense in the home, again­st both
fed­er­al and state encroach­ment. By mov­ing the Sec­ond Amend­ment
argu­ment here beyond the home, this case promis­es to help expand
Sec­ond Amend­ment rights even beyond the Heller and
McDon­ald stan­dard.

My July 2009 
inter­view with Gura
. My 2008 book on the Heller case,

Gun Con­trol on Tri­al
.

UPDATE: Thanks com­menter Chris Bren­nan:

The full deci­sion
.

[Hit and Run]

It will be inter­est­ing to see where this goes (if any­where) as Cal­i­for­nia has rough­ly the same law. In prac­tice, “good and sub­stan­tial rea­son” is a euphemism for “rich and/or pow­er­ful.” For exam­ple, some years ago I was told that I could get a con­cealed weapon per­mit in Orange Coun­ty for a $15,000 bribe “cam­paign contribution”–certainly not a sum that an ordi­nary per­son stuck liv­ing in a high-crime neigh­bor­hood could read­i­ly afford. Iron­i­cal­ly, that price was too low, and that sher­iff was eject­ed from office for it.

The good news for us peas­ants is that the gov­ern­ment seems to have final­ly caught on that they real­ly don’t need to wor­ry about an armed cit­i­zen­ry demon­strat­ing the pur­pose of the Sec­ond Amend­ment, for the rea­son I quot­ed a few years ago, but it is a good way to lose the next elec­tion. While elec­tions are mean­ing­less in terms of their impact on the gov­ern­ment, they do mat­ter to the indi­vid­u­al politi­cian who loss­es his place on the gravy train.

Quote of the Day
Apr 26th, 2011 by Ken Hagler

The phi­los­o­phy of gun con­trol: Teenagers are roar­ing through town at 90 MPH, where the speed lim­it is 25. Your solu­tion is to low­er the speed lim­it to 20, out­law any vehi­cle that has a round hood orna­ment or that can car­ry more than 10 gal­lons of fuel, require sen­si­tiv­i­ty train­ing and manda­to­ry annu­al test­ing for all licensed dri­vers, require all vehi­cle pur­chas­es to be doc­u­ment­ed at a deal­er­ship (with a 10-day wait­ing peri­od), and spec­i­fy the locks on the garage where the vehi­cles are stored (with their wheels removed and stored in a locked con­tain­er on the oth­er side of the home). Mean­while the most dan­ger­ous inter­sec­tions are changed from stop­lights to yield signs, and res­i­den­tial and school zone reg­u­la­tions are tight­ened with ‘no-stop’ rules so strict that even police can­not stop to set up a speed trap, thus giv­ing the speed­ers free reign in the very areas they are like­ly to do the most dam­age.

Tony B.

Good response to Socialists
Oct 2nd, 2010 by Ken Hagler

Addi­tion to the “20 Ques­tions” Respon­se…. S, a reg­u­lar read­er and com­menter here, had some com­ments to add to last week’s “20 Ques­tions” post, but for some rea­son his com­ments kept get­ting knocked off the blog. I still don’t know what that was about, but when he sent the com­ment to me via oth­er means I found it much worth say­ing. So here it is.

The answer to all twen­ty ques­tions is the same:

You and I are dif­fer­ent. I will not use vio­lence to achieve my per­son­al goals. I make my way in the world using peace­ful, vol­un­tary, mutu­al­ly ben­e­fi­cial trade. I use vio­lence only when nec­es­sary to defend my life and prop­er­ty from vio­lence ini­ti­at­ed by oth­ers. Even then, my respon­se will be appro­pri­ate to the threat and cir­cum­stances.

You and your ilk use vio­lence to get what you want. Whether it is mar­ket out­comes that dis­please you or tools you fear and loathe vio­lence is your first and only tool. It’s quite pathet­ic real­ly, how lim­it­ed your imag­i­na­tions have become. You can’t even imag­ine solu­tions to most prob­lems that don’t involve vio­lence. I typ­i­cal­ly have to choose from a myr­i­ad of options when nego­ti­at­ing a solu­tion to a prob­lem that trou­bles me; all you can ever do is demand new laws.

You’re also a cow­ard, and unwill­ing to do the dirty work required by your reliance on vio­lence. So you rely on oth­ers to pass “laws,” hire men armed with the very same guns that so ter­ri­fy you, give them cos­tumes and cos­tume jew­el­ry, steal the mon­ey to pay for the­se par­a­sites from their vic­tims, and then set them upon me.

There’s your answer. There is no fron­tier here, only a bleed­ing edge. Because you will try to have me killed if you can’t make me agree with you, while I will go my peace­ful way and do my best to ignore and shun you. I have trades to make and a life to live. There’s real­ly no point to fur­ther dis­cus­sion with you, since the out­come has already been decid­ed. By you.

Couldn’t say it as well myself. In fact, I didn’t. [The Ulti­mate Answer to Kings]

This was writ­ten in respon­se to a gun con­trol advo­cate, but it applies just as well to any oth­er sort of Social­ist (includ­ing the ones who run the Repub­li­can Par­ty).

Quote of the Day
May 6th, 2009 by Ken Hagler

...Guns will never be confiscated in the US: when martial law is declared, the gun owners will be given badges and arm-bands and sent out on patrol. As long as the President at the time is a right-winger and white, the gun nuts won't put up a fuss.

Unknown Liberal

Know Thine Enemy
Feb 8th, 2009 by Ken Hagler

The Sev­en Vari­eties of Gun Con­trol Advo­cate. The right of decent pri­vate cit­i­zens to per­son­al­ly pos­sess, trans­port, and respon­si­bly use arms with­out gov­ern­ment inter­fer­ence is the ulti­mate free­dom and the main pil­lar sup­port­ing all oth­er lib­er­ties. Few cul­tures have allowed their gen­er­al pop­u­la­tion access to weapons, the tools of pow­er, to the same degree as the Unit­ed States. Instead, most soci­eties have restrict­ed the keep­ing and bear­ing of arms to a select few pow­er bro­kers and their agents, often result­ing in oppres­sion on a grand scale.

Despite a mas­sive amount of his­tor­i­cal evi­dence to the con­trary, there is a sub­stan­tial body of Amer­i­cans, many occu­py­ing posi­tions of influ­ence, who con­tend that the abro­ga­tion of the Sec­ond Amend­ment is the quick­est path to domes­tic tran­quil­i­ty. Since this is as absurd as advo­cat­ing blood-letting as a cure for ane­mia, it would seem advis­able to ques­tion the motives and men­tal­i­ties of the gun con­trol advo­cates them­selves.

In my obser­va­tion, weapon pro­hi­bi­tion­ists can be bro­ken down into sev­en major cat­e­gories. Even though their motives may vary they all pose a mor­tal threat to lib­er­ty. [Jews for the Preser­va­tion of Firearms Own­er­ship]

Gun control doesn’t always matter
Dec 1st, 2008 by Ken Hagler

Guns and Mum­bai.

India’s gov­ern­ment not only failed to pro­tect its cit­i­zens from ter­ror­ism, it wouldn’t allow them to pro­tect them­selves. Check out this para­graph from the Wall Street Jour­nal:

At about 9:45 p.m., two gun­men, slen­der and in their mid-20s, ran up the cir­cu­lar dri­ve­way at the entrance to the Tri­dent. They shot the secu­ri­ty guard and two bell­hops. The hotel had met­al detec­tors, but none of its secu­ri­ty per­son­nel car­ried weapons because of the dif­fi­cul­ties in obtain­ing gun per­mits from the Indi­an gov­ern­ment, accord­ing to the hotel company’s chair­man, P.R.S. Oberoi.

On the oth­er hand, at least some Indi­an offi­cials are tak­ing respon­si­bil­i­ty for their fail­ure, which is more than we can say about any­one in the U.S. gov­ern­ment after Sep­tem­ber 11.

[The Agi­ta­tor]

I’ve seen this sort of claim a num­ber of places, but I dis­agree, because this isn’t a case of an indi­vid­u­al going postal in a shop­ping mall or a school. In those parts of the US where ordi­nary peo­ple can legal­ly car­ry hand­guns, the per­cent­age who do so is very low–so low that there would be at best one or two peo­ple with a pis­tol around if some­thing like this hap­pened here. Real life isn’t like Die Hard–one guy with a pis­tol going up again­st a trained infantry squad is just going to die with­out accom­plish­ing any­thing.

For the peo­ple on the spot to stop a ter­ror­ist attack like this, it’s also nec­es­sary for the cul­ture to be such that all or near­ly all of the peo­ple are armed at all times. That’s not the case in the US, and I know of no rea­son to think it’s the case in India either. In fact, the only inci­dent I know of in my life­time where an armed cit­i­zen­ry repelled heav­i­ly armed ter­ror­ists was in Soma­lia, when the city of Mogadishu drove off a ter­ror­ist attack by the Evil Empire. It was a cost­ly vic­to­ry, though–thousands of Soma­l­is died fight­ing about a com­pa­ny of Impe­ri­al Stormtroop­ers.

»  Substance:WordPress   »  Style:Ahren Ahimsa
© Ken Hagler. All rights reserved.