MatthewMaynard.net

On Tuesday, I received an email from the Gun Owners of America, detailing House Bill 69, titled the Firearms Freedom Act. Similar to measures passed last year in Montana and Tennessee, the email summarizes it like this:

The Firearms Freedom Act has a simple concept. It states that if a gun was made in Virginia, and then stays in Virginia, then the federal government may not regulate it under the Interstate Commerce Cause. (Because, you see, the gun was never part of any interstate commerce.)

By gun they mean not only a firearm receiver but also the all-useful suppressor, a safety device the feds have deemed too dangerous for the average person to have, as it apparently protects hearing too well for us to use it. The bill is important because it is an assertion of Tenth Amendment rights against the National Firearms Act of 1934, which unconstitutionally requires a tax on and registration of certain firearms and accessories the government wants to make prohibitively expensive.

Anyway, back to the inbox. The GOA was in favor of the bill and encouraged the reader to be as well, listing how they can contact their delegate and do the involved thing of taking part in their own government. Later that day, I received two emails from the National Rifle Association, commonly perceived to be the “extreme” gun rights organization. The two emails also covered bills introduced in the VA House of Delegates, including House Bills 8, 26, 49, 52, 72, 79, 106, 108, 109, 152, 171, 236, 251, 475, 489, 505, 637, 870, 885, and Senate Bill 79, all removing various restrictions on the rights to keep and bear. Likewise, the NRA was against House Bills 520 and 879 and Senate Bill 268.

Notice anything missing?

The NRA doesn’t want to touch the separation of powers issue for some reason. I would guess that they feel it either detracts from their goal of being “on target” on the guns issue (sorry) or they feel it is a non-starter, that they can’t win when it comes to selling machine guns to the general public. Viewing it like this detracts from the main issue facing the nation, the one that touches not only the Second Amendment but all the other amendments and articles – will or will not the Federal Government be restrained by its originating covenant? If it will be restrained, then we must support HB 69, and any bill like it in other states. If the federal government will not be restrained, then why are we playing tiddlywinks with the details of what arms are protected by the Second Amendment and what aren’t?

Not backing HB 69 makes me wonder if I should keep sending them my membership fee. If they won’t put the money to good use, perhaps someone else would put it to better use.

How many times have I been to a gun show and they’ve had a part I don’t need, but when I need it they don’t have it?

Whatever the number, increase it by one.

We got our CMP order last year, and have had need of a good cleaning kit, but it has been hard to come by. Between Appleseeds and the other stuff we do on weekends, we haven’t been to a gun show in quite some time. Today we were able to get to the one in Richmond. I saw a lot of good fun stuff that I wanted to buy but nothing as far as a complete M1 cleaning kit. Oh well, at least the Intertubes can provide me with one.

For those keeping score, ammo was still in the $1/2 per bang neighborhood, and the prices for weapons were doing their usual thing – similar to the last show and recent advertisements but much higher than a year or two ago. Don’t delay your purchases, you will only get more depressed when you finally do buy.

The Not-A-General head of the state of Libya wants to get rid of Switzerland, according to a report that, at press time, was uncorroborated by the UN and the Libyan government.

Switzerland should be wiped off the map and its land divided between France, Italy and Germany. That is what Libyan leader Colonel Gaddafi is calling for in a motion he filed to the United Nations, according to newspaper reports.

Gaddafi is set to put forward his plans to eradiate [sic] the Alpine state when Libya officially takes over the annual presidency of the UN General Assembly on September 15, the Daily Mail newspaper reported.

I’m sorry, but how exactly does he plan on doing this? Switzerland, after all, is the country where it is perfectly normal to see a man with a 7.62mm battle rifle strapped to his back in the grocery store and no one calls the cops. What army is he going to use, the Germans? They didn’t invade in WW2, and not for a lack of ability.

According to legend, the German general asked the Swiss general after the war “What would you have done had we invaded? We had a larger air force and more tanks, how could you have stopped us?”

To which the Swiss general replied “But we have twice as many citizens with rifles than you have soldier’s in your army. The militia would have turned out, shot twice, and gone home.”

Relations between Switzerland and Libya have been tense since Gaddafi’s son and his son’s wife were arrested and accused of assaulting a hotel chambermaid in Geneva a year ago.

DO. NOT. STEAL. THE. SWISS. HOTEL. TOWELS.

Even though the complaint was dropped and the couple released on bail, Gaddafi withdraw [sic] $5 billion from Swiss bank accounts, closed Swiss business in Libya and arrested Swiss nationals in the country.

Gaddafi first mentioned his plans to get rid of Switzerland at the G8 summit in Italy in July, the report said.

“Switzerland is a world mafia and not a state,” he said, according to the Daily Mirror newspaper.

Be careful, Colonel, they may just make you an offer you can’t refuse.

A spokesperson for the United Nations told CNBC.com that no official filing had been received from Gaddafi. A spokesperson for the Libyan government was not immediately available to comment to CNBC.com.

If I was the editor, I would have told the reporter to come back when he had something of substance to report, like, I don’t know, CORROBORATION. It’s an amusing story, and I’d love to see the Colonel try to take on the Swiss, but there’s no way the Swiss would let him and his UN cronies if it came to a fight. The smart money bets on the armed free people remaining so.

UPDATE 20090905 1238: Apparently, Libya also detained two Swiss businessmen over the issue. Seems Libya is acting a little uppity now that they’ve gotten rid of their nukes. Memo to Mohammar: YOU’RE DOING IT WRONG. The dictator is supposed to act like that when they have something to back up their rhetoric, like, say, a nuclear weapons program.

This time, its something useful for the unsanitary AR – a user-installable gas piston kit. Anyone who has ever cleaned an AR understands the necessity of such a device. One question though – with a single-piece op-rod, how do they avoid the problems the M1 had?

With the M1, gas exited the barrel into the gas tube and pushed directly back on the op rod. A too-hot cartridge load could bend the op rod and take the rifle out of commission. Their video shows excess gas venting out the front, but I’d like to see it in action before I put down $500. An outside review wouldn’t hurt either.

Now, if only they could do such a system for the AR-10, it might be a strong competitor for the M14 family.

Snowflakes in Hell calls it a Bump on the Road: Second Circuit to Second Amendment: Drop Dead. The 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals (New York, Connecticut, Vermont) has ruled that “only certain provisions of the Bill of Rights apply to the states, and the Second Amendment is one of those that does not…”

I’m curious to know two things. First, what other provisions of the Bill of Rights does the 2nd Circus think don’t apply to the states?

Second, what’s all the fuss about? Let’s examine the text of the amendment:

A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.

It seems to me that the restrictive clause is general in nature, not specific as it is in the First Amendment (Congress shall make no law…). Therefore, since it can’t be determined who is being restricted, it follows that all are restricted – that is, the Second Amendment is self-incorporating.

So why was the case brought in the first place? Oh, that’s right. Unelected judges are the new arbiters of our rights, even though individual oppression may now and then proceed from the courts of justice, the general liberty of the people can never be endangered from that quarter. So we have to run all our rights by them before we can exercise them. Remember that.

Courtesy of Alphecca, we have news of Florida Rep. Cliff Stearns introducing a national concealed carry reciprocity bill. That such a bill is necessary in this day and age is a sad commentary on people’s ignorance of the Constitution, but still, it’s a step in the right direction. Here’s Stearns’ take on the bill.

The sad fact, however, is that this bill is going nowhere, quickly. Apparently such bills are routinely introduced and pigeonholed in committee, to the effect that Congress piddles, twiddles, and resolves, but does nothing. But Rep. Stearns is doing the right thing by at least introducing the bill. You never pass the bills you don’t introduce, after all.

Now, some will say that the government should force states to guarantee reciprocity for marriage licenses. True, according to the letter of the law, they should. However, while Virginia may be required to recognize a gay couple’s marriage certificate from Massachusetts, they are under no obligation to issue their own to gay couples within the Commonwealth. Personally, I think no state should issue a marriage license – marriage is (or at least should be) a permanent relationship between a man and a woman, with no input from the state. After all, the state didn’t create the institution, God did. If anyone should be in the business of issuing marriage licenses, it should be the churches.

But that’s an issue for another day.

Someone cares about left handed AK shooters. I’m telling you, whoever taps the left handed market will be able to write their own check.

A man after my own heart.

I am cautiously optimistic about yesterday’s 5-4 decision in DC v. Heller. Reading the commentary over @ War on Guns and you get a good idea of how serious gun owners are looking at the result. I’ll reiterate a comment I made there: we are better off than we were before – not by much, but the fight over gun rights has never been all-at-once. It has always been incremental, unfortunately.

The fight for our rights began anew yesterday. I’ll say more after I’ve read the opinion in full.

The extremely junior senator from Illinois came out last week in San Francisco (not like that, get your mind out of the gutter) and said – well, let’s let him speak for himself:

You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, a lot of them — like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them. And they’ve gone through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. So it’s not surprising then that they get bitter, and they cling to guns, or religion, or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them, or anti-immigrant sentiment, or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

I’ve got a news flash for junior. The reason I cling to guns is because I can’t trust the government to protect me. The reason I cling to God is because I can trust Him to do so.

Audio below, I got it from here.

 

 Standard Podcast: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download