Arms and the Law

Story here.

An unbelievably good movie -- here's the trailer. The Imperial War Museum got the director of the Lord of the Rings series to work on their century-old WWI footage, on the condition that the entire film must consist of real footage, improved as best his team could. No talking heads, no modern re-enactors. They did an unbelievable job, improving resolution, turning early movies' slow frame rates into modern speed, colorizing, using lip readers to tell them what people were saying and then creating a sound track with that speech (speakers chosen to match the proper local accents).

It's here in Tucson through Tuesday. Oh, and, they managed to make some of it 3-D (but only some showings have that).

UPDATE: you can find tickets on Fandango. Just input your zip code at the top right menu.

After Age 92, after serving 60 years in Congress. I met him a few times, circa 1980 .... gad, 39 years ago. He did much good for the right to arms, extending back to the Gun Control Act controversy... over half a century ago.

ATF has changed the mailing addresses for many of its forms, including FFL issuance and renewal, import licensing, and many NFA forms. I'm told this was incidental to their changing banks; it looks like all the forms are ones that require payment.

Up against the wall, Bambi!

Filings here. It was filed a few hours ago.

Malone v. Singas, Eastern District of NY. The court finds that nunchucks are 2A-protected (or to be more exact, presumes that as arms they are protected, and the government failed to refute this), that they are in common-enough use, and that the government has produced no evidence that they are used in crime to the point where anyone could care.

It's rather typical of modern-day rulings in that it takes 32 pages to say this.....

December 15!

I was in DC during the Bicentennial of the Constitution (1987-89) and during what should have been the bicentennial of the Bill of Rights (1991). The first got big play, a commission headed by Chief Justice Burger, celebrations, etc.. The second was virtually ignored. My guess at the reason was that DC is of course a company town, the company is the federal government, and the Constitution is what gave that company power. The Bill of Rights ... well, it was nice but not really that important.

Too late.

"If guns had been a stronger part of our culture, if there had been a sense of duty for one to protect their individual rights, and as a show of force against a government power - and had legal carry been a common thing - it would have made a huge difference."

But without one, sometimes an sometimes an attack chihuahua will suffice....

Right here. Very well written. The case challenges the NYC restriction that prohibits the holder of a permit to possess (the type most frequently issued) to transport their firearm to any location other than to a shooting range inside NYC.

"The question presented is:

Whether the City's ban on transporting a licensed, locked, and unloaded handgun to a home or shooting range outside city limits is consistent with the Second Amendment, the Commerce Clause, and the constitutional right to travel."

Adam Kraut discusses it on the Prince Law blog. The importance here is ATF might rule that a certain accessory attached to a certain gun makes it an NFA firearm, which means it could be returned if the person submitting it had an SOT, and also means that he committed a bunch of felonies in making it and shipping it to the agency....

The University of North Texas suspends a law student, apparently because he owned guns. There was an anonymous claim that he had threatened someone, a claim that he clearly refuted (not just with witnesses that said he wasn't at the location, but by producing his cell phone's GPS data).

Dave Workman has the story. Not that that will sway anyone.

Jail escapee beats up guard, gets away, breaks into woman's house and approaches her bedroom. She drills him thru the head. Problem solved.

In Ass'n of N.J. Rifle and Pistol Clubs v. Attorney General.

The case is quite well laid-out for an anti-2A result, tho I course like the dissent better:

"Yet the majority treats the Second Amendment differently in two ways. First, it weighs the merits of the case to pick a tier of scrutiny. That puts the cart before the horse. For all other rights, we pick a tier of scrutiny based only on whether the law impairs the core right. The Second Amendment's core is the right to keep weapons for defending oneself and one's family in one's home. The majority agrees that this is the core. So whenever a law impairs that core right, we should apply strict scrutiny, period. That is the case here.

Second, though the majority purports to use intermediate scrutiny, it actually recreates the rational-basis test forbidden by Heller. It suggests that this record favors the government, but make no mistake--that is not what the District Court found. The majority repeatedly relies on evidence that the District Court did not rely on and expert testimony that the District Court said was "of little help." 2018 WL 4688345, at *8. It effectively flips the burden of proof onto the challengers...."

Has anyone suggested taking a hockey puck to a gunfight.

In my ten years in Washington, I became amazed at the inability of policy-makers to make policy. I have since become amazed at the inability of higher education to think.

Here's a story on the proposal. If they're proposing the tax in order to fund anti-violence agencies, we might ask why they don't tax violent offenders instead? Oh, I forgot, violent criminals are not the problem. The problem is peaceful gun owners. Having enacted just about every form of gun control known, the legislature must find something more to do.

Story here. The school was called upon to deal with nasty SOB who made no secret of his desire to kill people and shoot up a school. So they transferred him from a school for "special needs" students (I'd never through of homicidal compulsion as a special need, but at least it fit) into a standard, and large, school. Then they apparently ignored his continuing threats. After the shooting, they spent tens of thousands on PR advice, and stonewalled all attempts to investigate.

Graphic here. No one NEEDS them, after all.

From Randy Cassingham, who has an amusing blog and an equally amusing email list.