The Smallest Minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities. – Ayn Rand
BIG POST ERROR, POST ID 105702478749413506
REPORT IT
You have NO idea just how infuriating this error message is.
A long, involved, link-filled post that I’ve been working on for AN HOUR AND A HALF is GONE!
You think the Incredible Hulk gets pissed?
The expression “going Postal” FITS.
Clayton Cramer Reiterates My Question
In his post Why The NRA May Be Right To Not Rush a Second Amendment Case to the Supreme Court
There are a lot of gun rights activists who are upset with NRA’s reluctance to go to court with a Second Amendment case. These recent decisions by the Supreme Court are strong arguments for why that reluctance is sensible. In the University of Michigan law school case, the Supreme Court decided that even though the Fourteenth Amendment is explicit that there will be no discrimination based on race, discrimination based on race, as long as it’s not made too explicit, is okay. In the other case, the Supreme Court ignored precedent, rewrote some of Colonial America’s sodomy laws, and then used due process and a lot of armwaving to strike down a state law of the sort that has been present for centuries–and then discounted everything more than 50 years old as not particularly relevant to their decision. And you suddenly are going to trust the Supreme Court to make a decision about the meaning of the Second Amendment? All your arguments in favor of an individual right are based on:
1. Historical evidence that will be ignored, just like colonial Connecticut and Plymouth’s homosexual sodomy laws were ignored.
2. Precedents of both federal and state supreme courts that are largely more than 50 years old.
3. Notions of individual rights that are even older.
Against this, the gun control side has the same elites that wanted the sodomy law struck down. I think the NRA may be right not to rush to the Supreme Court of Urban Elitism.
I disagree. I don’t think that waiting will do us any good. I think that the Silviera case is the most cut-and-dried violation of the Second Amendment extant, and I think it’s the perfect one with which to overturn U.S. v Cruikshank and Presser v. Illinois. But he’s right: SCOTUS could very well ignore historical evidence. It very well could ignore older precedents and uphold Cruikshank. It could ignore that the right to arms was held as an individual one since before the ratification of the Constitution. It’s a hard question to consider: Do individual citizens have a Constitutionally guaranteed right to keep and bear weapons of military usefulness? And are the States restricted by the 14th Amendment from infringing on this right? Yes or no?
SCOTUS might very well answer: “No.” It might (probably would) be a 5-4 decision, and the dissents might be philosophical works of art.
BUT:
That would be, to me, the signal that the system is broken beyond repair.
Right now, I still believe the system can work as designed. I think, though, that if SCOTUS can take it upon itself to render meaningless a part of the Bill of Rights that is explicit, then the Constitution is, for all intents and purposes, null and void.
I’ve often wondered if SCOTUS has denied cert. on Second Amendment cases just because the Justices couldn’t bring themselves to be that blatant in violating the Constitution. Easier to avoid than to do that.
I’m betting about 60-40 that they’ll deny cert. to Silviera, too. THEN where will that put us? In one circuit the right to arms will be legally recognized, but in another (the one where I live) it will not.
UPDATE:
Given the newness of my Comments, I’m going to copy and reply here:
AlphaPatriot responds:
I’m going to quote an earlier post on my website because I think it’s relevant:
The other issue that mitigates against granting cert in the Silveira case is that the issue involved was a state assault weapons ban and Emerson was a Federal statute. Just two different ways of reaching a result. What you need to understand is that the Supreme Court is not in the business of doing justice in an individual case, only if taking the case will affect the law. And that case is not necessarily about whether there is an individual right, rather, about whether it’s a “reasonable regulation.” In other words, if the ban would likely be upheld on other grounds, even if the Supreme Court found an individual right, it is unlikely that it would take the case.
However, the issue that mitigates for granting a writ of certiorari is the fact that two Circuit Courts are in disagreement on a key issue. This often prompts SCOTUS to step in and settle the dispute.
I fully expect them to dodge if they do grant cert. The 5th Circuit certainly did – ruling as narrowly as the could get away with and avoiding addressing anything outside the question at hand. The 9th did not. They stated plainly that the right was not individual, and that individuals had no standing in bringing the question before the Court.
Somehow, I don’t see how SCOTUS can let that slide given the decision in Emerson.
But you might be right – they very well could decide that it’s a “reasonable regulation” of an individual right. That, I think, would be a not-quite-phyrric victory for gun owners. I’m not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV, but I’ve read a LOT of case law concerning the right to arms. Since Silviera appears to hinge on whether or not the right is indivdual (as that’s how it was decided: “The district court dismissed all of the plaintiffs’ claims. Because the Second Amendment does not confer an individual right to own or possess arms, we affirm the dismissal of all claims brought pursuant to that constitutional provision” citing Hickman v. Block.) At a minimum it would mean remanding the case to the 9th Circuit for re-hearing on the basis that Hickman was in error. THEN the 9th would just find it a “reasonable regulation.”
Let’s be honest here: I’m not expecting a Brown v. Board of Education-like earth-shattering decision, should they decide to hear it at all.
But I can hope.
Oh, and go read AlphaPatriot’s older post on this topic. Very good.
Beware of Engineers with Screwdrivers
Sometimes I really hate my job.
I’m an engineer by profession. I’ve got the State license and everything. I’ve got a customer’s machine that refuses to behave. It’s got a (Star Trek Technobabble Alert!) single-ended 1024ppr quadrature encoder on it that yeilds 129 pulses per inch – most of the time. Except occasionally when moving in one direction, it will drop some counts. Like several inches worth. And since we’re trying to measure to 1/64″ accuracy, that’s not a good thing.
The encoder is connected to an Allen-Bradley high-speed counter card that just counts, 0-999, then rolls over. The counter card communicates with an Allen-Bradley PLC 5/20 processor that totalizes the count. There are three other IDENTICAL encoders on the machine, and they all work hunky-dory. We’ve changed the encoder, we’ve changed the high-speed counter card, today we changed the CABLE.
It’s still thumbing its nose at us.
(Edited to add: It’s not mechanical, either. Rack & pinion gearing, positive keyed zero slip coupling. Anybody got a chicken to sacrifice?)
UPDATE! Problem solved! Of course, after the fact it was something simple, and blindingly obvious – the 5VDC power supply was only putting out 3.5V – just barely enough to make the encoder card work – most of the time.
Engineers with screwdrivers? Should be engineers with voltmeters.
Dept. of Our Collapsing Schools
Connie du Toit has an excellent post up on the state of education in this country – the difference between learning versus memorizing, and much, much more.
I forwarded it to my sister, who is a math and science teacher, for comment.
If you have children, you need to read this. If you don’t, you need to read it to understand why we’re graduating people who are essentially illiterate ignorants.
Oh Yeah, Gun Control is a Critical Issue
Thanks to Ravenwood, I just discovered that the Million Moms March organization had a gathering at the West Palm Beach City Hall to commemorate national ASK Day.
Yup, those Democratic Presidential hopefuls really need to beat the gun-control drum so they can reach their electoral base.
I Just…Aww Screw It.
Go read THIS (I can’t improve on it,) then watch the piece. (7Mb – broadband is recommended, but if you’re on dialup, it’s worth the wait.)
Another “Bankrupt the Gun Manufacturers & Dealers” Lawsuit Bites the Dust
According to the Associated Press, Appeals court affirms dismissal of state’s lawsuit against gun makers
June 24, 2003, 5:59 PM EDT
NEW YORK — A Manhattan appeals court Tuesday affirmed a lower court’s dismissal of a lawsuit in which the state accused gun makers of knowingly contributing to the “flood of illegal guns” in New York that result in injuries or death.
The Appellate Division of state Supreme Court found 3-1 that it was “legally inappropriate, impractical and unrealistic” to require the gun makers to take unspecified steps to lessen the availability and criminal use of handguns.
State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer (hawk, spit) sued members of the gun industry in 2001. He alleged that they had created a public nuisance by knowingly distributing firearms in a way that put large numbers of guns in the hands of people who use them illegally.
And really massive numbers into the hands of people who use them legally, and that’s what really bothers you, Spitz, isn’t it?
“Defendants know that a significant portion of their guns become crime guns but turn a blind eye so as to increase profits, at the cost of many human lives and much human suffering,” Spitzer said in his original complaint.
State Supreme Court Justice Louis York ruled Aug. 10, 2001, that Spitzer had presented insufficient evidence to support his claim that nine gun manufacturers, 12 wholesalers and three importers had violated the state’s public nuisance law.
York, finding the state’s case failed to link the gun industry directly to the public nuisance, wrote, “it is obvious that the parties most directly responsible for the unlawful use of handguns are the individuals who unlawfully use them.”
“We agree and affirm,” the appeals judges wrote.
How about that – logic and reason from two New York courts.
They said the defendants were engaged in “the lawful manufacture, marketing and sale of a defect-free product in a highly regulated activity (!!!) far removed from the downstream, unlawful use of handguns.”
The appeals judges said it would be impractical for the courts to try to regulate the gun industry.
Not to mention, illegal. The making of laws is restricted to the legislative branch, not the judicial branch.
The legislative and executive branches of government might be “better suited to address the societal problems” at issue in this case, the appellate majority wrote.
And you fail there, every time.
Juanita Scarlett, a spokeswoman for Spitzer, said, “We believe that the court misapplied certain doctrinal principles. We are considering an appeal.”
Let’s see, you’ve been slapped down by a State court, then bitch-slapped by the Appeals court, but you’re going to appeal again.
Another example of the bottomless pockets of the State (financed by the citizens) trying to punish the gun manufacturers and distributors financially through the court system because they cannot accomplish what they want in the legislature.
Lawyers for the gun manufacturers could not be reached by telephone for comment.
At the rates they charge, I hope not.
Spitzer’s lawsuit was similar to one brought in U.S. District Court in Brooklyn by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. The civil rights group alleged that gun makers knew corrupt dealers were selling firearms to criminals in minority communities and did nothing to stop it.
This was another of the nine lawsuits so far thrown out or defeated out of something around 33 that have been filed.
Then there’s the case of Bryco manufacturing losing a lawsuit when a moron failed the first rule of gun safety and didn’t keep a gun pointed in a safe direction. A babysitter, trying to unload a Bryco .380 took the gun off safe to clear the chamber (just as you must with a 1911) and PUT HIS FINGER ON THE TRIGGER. The gun discharged and 16 year-old Brandon Maxfield was struck in the jaw. The jury found Bryco liable for $50.9 MILLION.
Bryco makes crappy guns, but that one wasn’t defective. It worked as it was designed to.
Bryco is also being sued in New Mexico for what amouts to the same thing. The Brady Center (hawk, spit) reports that both Bryco (manufacturer) and Jennings (distributor) should be held liable for making handguns that can be accidentally fired by children. Their argument: the Jennings J-22 doesn’t have a magazine disconnect. Again, neither does a 1911. And the magazine disconnect is usually one of the first things removed from a Browning Hi Power in order to give it a better trigger pull. I don’t think Glocks have a magazine disconnect, do they? (I’m not a Glock fan.)
As far as Brady and the VPC and the rest are concerned, if it can go “BANG!” it’s too dangerous for anyone outside of the government to have.
Interestingly, there’s some retaliatory action going on. Valor Corp., the distributor that was found to be 5% at fault when 13 year-old Nathaniel Brazill shot teacher Barry Grunow with a .25 caliber Raven that had been purchased several years before, has had the $1.2 million judgment against it thrown out. Brazill STOLE the gun from a family friend (found 50% responsible – the school district was found to be 45% responsible. The shooter was apparently not responsible at all, though he’s serving a 28 year sentence for the killing.) So, according to the Sun-Sentinel, Valor is suing the Grunow widow for court costs and legal fees.
Payback’s a bitch, ain’t it? You can bet the lawyer rich from the tobacco settlement that represented her last time won’t be available for this, and I doubt that the Brady Center will pay her bills, either.
Let’s get the lawsuit pre-emption bill passed and signed and end this crap. If a gun manufacturer really makes a defective product, they can still be sued for product liability, but if it works as designed there should be no lawsuit.
PLEASE CALL OR WRITE YOUR U.S. SENATORS.
URGE THEM TO:
1) Support S. 659 and
2) Defeat a filibuster of the bill.
E-MAIL your Senators.
WRITE or FAX your Senators
CALL your Senators via the Capitol Switchboard at: 202-224-3121.
Please contact your Senator today, and help keep the rights of gun owners intact!
Comments Are Functional
But I’ve switched services, so all the old comments are, unfortunately, gone.
Sorry about that. But this site is only six weeks or so old, and there weren’t that many comments anyway. Hopefully Haloscan will be more reliable. (It’s free too, so I won’t hold my breath.)
Back from the Casa Grande Shoot
We knocked off early due to the increasing heat and had lunch at Famous Sam’s, but a great time was had by all.
I got to set off the one tannerite charge (one shot, thank you,) and I found out that the 1917 Enfield makes a pretty decent skeet gun. (No kidding! I have witnesses!)
I’ve gotta do some more of that!
Still have quite a bit of ammo left, but not a single round of .30-06.
I plan on taking care of THAT little problem shortly.
Open Mouth, Insert Foot, Shoot Foot
Day by Day, it just keeps getting better…
(Off to the AR15.com Casa Grade shoot. I’ll write about it later. I’ve got 450 rounds of .223, about 200 rounds of .45, about 100 rounds of .30-06, and 200 rounds of .22. That ought to last until about noon, I hope.)