Free Shooting Introduction

In the effort to promote responsible gun ownership and rights awareness, I make the following open offer to any resident or visitor in the Metro DC area:

If you have never shot a gun and would like to try, I am willing to take you shooting free of charge. I will provide the firearms, ammunition, eye/ear protection and I will cover your range fees. I guarantee if you are on the fence about gun ownership and usage, you will not be at the end of the session. You will have fun and learn a little in the process.

I do my introductions in Northern Virginia. Evenings or on the weekends at your convenience with minimal prior arrangements. Contact me for details and to schedule your free introduction!

If you are in the Chesapeake/Hampton Roads area, Brian, an NRA instructor in Virginia Beach, is willing to do the same if you're in the area on a Sunday afternoon or Monday evening. Drop him a note to make the arrangements.

5 people have learned to shoot! Would you like to be next?

Tuesday, July 17, 2007

Parker Going to the Supreme Court!

Big news yesterday. The District is filing their appeal in Parker vs. DC to the Supreme Court! This doesn't mean the Court will accept the case but it does mean it is going to be an interesting summer. SCOTUSblog has the details.

As usual, the idiocy comes out whenever Mayor Fenty opens his mouth.
The Mayor said: "We have made the determination that this law can and should be defended and we are willing to take our case to the highest court in the land to protect the city's residents. Our handgun law has saved countless lives -- keeping guns out of the hands of those who would hurt others or themselves."
Really, Mayor Fenty? So, since the total gun ban took effect in 1976, I would assume as a result the number of people who have died as a result of guns and the intent to hurt others or themselves should be zero? No violent drive-bys, back alley murders or suicide by mouth injected bullet.

But it's not zero. A long way from zero. That ban you speak so glowingly of, sir, has done wonders for the safety of its citizens. Actually, it has done little to protect them since the primary users of guns in your city, criminals, have no difficulty preying on them with the very object you purport to have banned within its limits.

Tell me, Mr. Fenty, how has that been working out for you?

Seriously, if you're going to defend a failed policy, at least make sure that it has some fudgable data to make it look like it was actually working. Even a brain dead hamster can tell by reading in the Washington Post that people get shot in the District all the time. Even the most clueless liberal can see the policy doesn't work (not that they'll admit it).
In an earlier filling in the D.C. Circuit, city officials said their appeal to the Supreme Court would present some variation of these questions: "(1) whether the panel majority's decision conflicts with the Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939), as Judge [Karen LeCraft] Henderson concluded in dissenting from the panel majority's decision; (2) whether the Second Amendment protects firearms possession or use that is not associated with service in a State militia; (3) whether the Amendment applies differently to the District because of its constitutional status, as Judge Henderson also concluded; and (4) whether the challenged laws represent reasonable regulation of whatever rights the Amendment protects." The city noted that the panel had acknowledged that its ruling conflicts with decisions "of most other federal courts of appeals, many State courts, and the highest local court in this jurisdiction, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals."
Ah, Mayor Fenty is going to try the approach the dissenting judge engaged in by saying that DC isn't a State. He is trying for a ruling in his favor on narrow, flowery legal edifices that hopefully will skirt the actual issue to allow the ban to stay in place. Barely.

The problem with this approach is it makes the case that US citizens living in DC do not get the same rights under the Constitution that everyone else in the other 50 states gets. Since DC isn't a State, he argues, states rights don't apply. A State-but-not-quite-a-State type thinking.

This type of thinking is very dangerous. Because if Fenty can read the 2nd out of the Constitution on the grounds that it doesn't apply to a Federal city because it lacks statehood, who's to say he can't do it with the other amendments as well? You know, like the 1st Amendment and require licenses before anyone can publish or speak.

Or how about the 13th Amendment? What's that one, you ask? Well, I'm sure the black folks who live in DC will develop a vested interest in that one. That's the Amendment that abolished slavery. Well, if the 2nd doesn't apply to the District because it isn't a state, why not the 13th as well?

If self-defense isn't a fundamental right of all Americans then neither is freedom based on skin color. The advantage of the 13th not applying to the District under Fenty's logic is the ready pool of plantation and manual laborers already present and ready for new chains in the so-called Chocolate City. It would be a lot cheaper that hiring illegals.

I don't see this logic holding up.

It is going to be interesting. Yippee!

Wednesday, July 4, 2007

Quote of the Day

Happy Fourth of July Everyone!

I'm getting myself back on track with this.

But for today, just got home from seeing Transformers. I know, I'm geeking out. Before the movie, they broadcast this announcement that "Silence is Golden" during the movie.

Matt, my friend Tom's 13 year old son quips back as this is on the screen:

"Silence is golden, duct tape is silver".

We lost it.

Enjoy your 4th!