(thanks to TheFirearmBlog for the heads-up!!)

The MP5 is a nice, popular,  little 9mm sub-machine gun from H&K.    Well…. It is hard to buy “assault” type rifles in the US, certainly in California.  ATI has been making a feel-a-like version that is chambered in .22LR – a rimfire, ergo not an “assault” weapon.  As mentioned here, H&K was suing ATI for, effectively, a design copyright breach.  And, as detailed here, they have settled a lawsuit whereby:

• ATI will stop making/importing the GSG-5
• Current stock in the US can be sold up until Jan 31 2010
• ATI will continue to be able to service rifles in the marketplace.

Too bad.  It was a very well-working .22 rifle that was quite suitable for learning the MP5 system.  If you want one… get it now….

I had a conversation with a friend the other day about gun control.  He really liked the idea of banning guns because it would reduce murder.  I tried to point out that there were already laws against murder — still, he insisted, it had to so something…..

This morning I woke up, considering the pending Supreme court case against Chicago (no guns allowed), and that I will probably never visit my friend in New York because of their weird gun licensing issues and I wondered….  In LA, while it wont last, the gun laws are very permissive compared to New York and Chicago.. So..  What is the murder rate in these 3 cities?

I found this nice CBS  story which gave me some numbers for 2008…  I decided to make a table.

Hmm..  My exciting conclusion?  Gun control seems to not be the deciding factor in determining murder rates.

Nothing new here…  Here is a nice story from Gun Owners of America.  Here is a well written summary from that article:

“The reason that European nations with more guns tend to have lower violence is political rather than criminological. Gun ownership generally has no affect on how much violent crime a society has. Violent crime is determined by fundamental economic and sociocultural factors, not the mere availability of just one of an innumerable bevy of potential murder instruments. Politicians in nations with severe crime problems often think that banning guns will be a quick fix. But gun bans don’t work; if anything, they make things worse. They disarm the law-abiding while being ignored by the violent and the criminal. Yet nations with severe violence problems tend to have severe gun laws. By the same token, the murder rates in handgun-banning U.S. cities — New York, Chicago, Washington, D.C. — are far higher than in states like Pennsylvania and Connecticut, where handguns are legal and widely owned.”

Pretty much sums it up…  If you have high crime, restricting law abiding citizens makes things worse.  On the other hand (Consider the 1992 Kansas City experiment), if you focus on enforcing the laws that take guns from criminals — that can work.

DC is an interesting example.  They outlawed new gun ownership in 1976…  Homicide fell for 12 years against the US average — because of the restriction? Perhaps…  Then, perhaps due to drugs, it rapidly became the murder capital of the US.  Gun control reduce crime, or, did it make for a fertile soil for the criminal element to come in?  Here is the example of attempting to restrict law abiding citizens as well as criminals — of course the criminals don’t end up being very restricted in practice.

We forgot to mention this during last Saturday’s class…

As seen here (Minnesota Independent)…Turns out that Franken, when reading the 4th amendment to DOJ officials, was just being cute after all.

He, along with Klobuchar (the other MN Senator) voted to extend the Patriot Act, roving wiretaps and all!

Below is the text of Gov. Schwarzenegger’s signing statement:

To the Members of the California State Assembly:

I am signing Assembly Bill 962.

This measure would require vendors of handgun ammunition to keep a log of information on handgun ammunition sales, store ammunition in a safe and secure manner, and require the faceto-face transfer of ammunition sales. Although I have previously vetoed legislation similar to this measure, local governments have demonstrated that requiring ammunition vendors to keep records on ammunition sales improves public safety. These records have allowed law enforcement to arrest and prosecute persons who have no business possessing firearms and ammunition: gang members, violent parolees, second and third strikers, and even people previously serving time in state prison for murder. Utilized properly, this type of information is invaluable for keeping communities safe and preventing dangerous felons from committing crimes with firearms.

Moreover, this type of recordkeeping is no more intrusive for law abiding citizens than similar laws governing pawnshops or the sale of cold medicine. Unfortunately, even the most successful local program is flawed; without a statewide law, felons can easily skirt the record keeping requirements of one city by visiting another. Assembly Bill 962 will fix this problem by mandating that all ammunition vendors in the state keep records on ammunition sales.

As Governor, I have sought the appropriate balance between public safety and the right to keep and bear arms. I have signed important public safety measures to regulate the sale and transfer of .50 caliber rifles, instituted the California Firearms License Check program, and promoted the use of microstamping technology in handguns. I have also vetoed many pieces of legislation that sought to place unreasonable restrictions and burdens on firearms dealers and ammunition vendors. Assembly Bill 962 reasonably regulates access to ammunition and improves public safety without placing undue burdens on consumers.

For these reasons, I am pleased to sign this bill.
Sincerely,
Arnold Schwarzenegger

Really? Such efforts have been shown to stop crime? It wont be a burden to keep files forever and to document every sale? It wont burden firearms people to no longer be able to mail order ammunition? And, as a model, he holds up his “successful” previous measure like microstamping — which even the DOJ says is unenforceable because it is so unfeasible. Further he holds up the embarrassment of a law that requires people to register when they buy cold medicine? For these reasons he was “pleased” to sign the bill???? WTF??? Of course now the felons will no longer skirt the law by going to a nearby city — they will have to go to a nearby state.

Governor Schwarzenegger failed to veto the ammo bill AB962 making it law in California effective February, 2011.  I hope that everyone feels safer knowing that it will be more difficult for law abiding citizens to purchase ammo.

There is hope!

Gene Hoffman of the CalGuns Foundation has outlined the plan of attack to fight implementation of AB962 in 2011.  You can read the whole post on CalGuns.  He writes that AB962 regulates the routes and rates of common mail carriers by requiring verification of identity of or exemption status of ORM-D (ammunition) receivers.  This is federally preempted through the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994 (FAAAA).

From the FAAAA

General rule.— Except as provided in subparagraph (B), a State, political subdivision of a State, or political authority of 2 or more States may not enact or enforce a law, regulation, or other provision having the force and effect of law related to a price, route, or service of an air carrier or carrier affiliated with a direct air carrier through common controlling ownership when such carrier is transporting property by aircraft or by motor vehicle (whether or not such property has had or will have a prior or subsequent air movement).

Many of you have probably heard that the US Supreme Court is going to be hearing another case about the Second Amendment.  I have heard a lot of press about this and mostly it tends to be wrong as the news sources don’t seem to get what the issue is.

I finally found a good story about this by Michael Dorf available at Findlaw.

Here is the short summary:  The Heller v DC ruling answered the question “is the right to bear arms” an individual or a collective freedom — it is an individual freedom.  So, as far as the Federal Government is concerned, it cannot pass laws that restrict an individual’s right.  But here is the catch:  The Constitution and the Bill of Rights were written and applied to the Federal Government, not the states.   So, in the past, a state could have passed a law that restricted freedom of the press, but, the Federal government could not. — Washington DC is governed by the Federal Government so Heller v DC is the law of DC.

I said that “in the past” a state could pass such laws.  That changed with the 14th Amendment.  As part of the interpretation of  “XIV” is the idea of “incorporation” of certain laws against the states.  Over time, a very clear mandate has come down, for example, that the 1st and 4th Amendment very much apply to state laws, so, these days a state cannot pass a law that violates either of these amendments.

Chicago has a law that says you cannot own a handgun.  The question in McDonald v Chicago is whether the 14th Amendment provides for the incorporation of the 2nd Amendment against the states much like it does the 1st and the 4th.  The answer seems fairly obvious — why would only some amendments be affected and not others? But, it turns out that legally it is a phenomenally complicated matter involving different specific rights provided for by the 14th Amendment and how those rights get applied to state laws — is it a due process issue?  is it a  “privileges and immunities” issue?  What are the history of those issues, etc. etc. etc.   Ug!

Of course the word “State” appears in the 2nd Amendment just to add minor complications .  Sure, it seems that “State” means nation in this case, but, perhaps the individual States’ freedoms are being what is protected…  Of course then the States could determine their own measure of safety by putting in place any laws they want….

Man without hands can’t cash checks because he cannot provide a thumbprint.

Grandmother gets thrown in jail for purchasing too much cold medicine for her grandchildren.  It was obvious that she wasn’t making meth, but, the law is the law.

Clove cigarettes (and other flavored cigarettes) become outlawed.  Because kids like to smoke $8/pack lung-burning cigarettes rather than $4/pack smooth Camels (or just stealing them from their parents)?  Best law ever.  Our smoking president signed it, it doesn’t affect him.  Menthol cigarettes are specifically listed as still ok, presumably because it mostly kills black americans…

LAUSD spends $8300/student and is considered one of the worst public schools in the nation.  For $9100, we can send them to a community college.  $9k, also gets you into a decent private school — but you have to come up with that yourself.

I wonder why we are having a budget crisis…