Thursday, January 31, 2008

The Brits, 'Us', & Ski Masks - Over Here, and Over There

The Other Side of Kim du Toit - TheOtherSideofKim 'Over Here, and Over There

Kim Du Toit, who I admire above all others as the Supreme gun-blogger on the net (and who I hold to a higher standard) offers a compare-and-contrast pair of news articles, where-in smash-and-grab robbers burst into a store with the obvious intent to steal the valuable stuff.

Case #1: England - Four ski-mask clad robbers burst into a British store armed with a hammer. The proprietor is intimidated to the role of observer, as the bandits smashes display cases, grab the loot and escapes to their waiting van. It is only due to the watchful habits of Bobbies *(policemen)* that they observed driving erratically, stopped, arrested and the forty-thousand pounds ($80,000) worth of stolen property is returned to the merchant.

Case #2: America - a ski-mask clab robber bursts into a store in Texas ...

From Kim's description of the event:
The store clerk began firing as the robber attempted to come over the counter.

The robber fled in a silver Ford Taurus, but was stopped about a mile from the FM 933, Highway 22 intersection by Hill and Bosque County deputies.

That's what I'm talking about!

Nothing was stolen, no property (eg: display cases) was destroyed.

The fact that the would-be robber was apprehended while making his getaway was due to normal police patrols only underscores that protection of private property is enhanced by the
ability of the would-be victim to protect himself and his property.

An earlier dialogue with the self-styled British "ABSO-Monger" demonstrated that The Brits ... especially what passes for a LEO-presence ...tend to believe that their gun control laws are justified by the lessening of "murders by firearms".

This anecdotal comparison between robbery-with-violence crimes reinforces the proposition that gun-control serves the interest of the Goblins more than it serves the interest of the average citizen.

I rest my case.

Encoded Ammunition: Questions

A comment on my last post (Encoded Ammunition: Mississippi) presented some very good questions about the actual effect and enforcement of the laws, if and when they are enacted. Because the implications are so complex I chose to respond as a separate article; there is too much material here to fit within the format of a comment.

All of the bills which have been reviewed here were proposed in the month of January, 2008. They are very short and simplistic. In my personal opinion, none of the bills proposed for Illinois, Indiana and especially Mississippi are fit to become law because they are flawed. The questions in this comment illustrate the unaddressed problems.

Note also that the process of providing an 'unique' serial number to identify the owner of the bullet (or loaded ammunition) has also been called "microstamping" and "serialization". We'll use the term "encoded" or "encoding" consistently in this discussion.

Here's the comment:

One question about this law. What about people who reload their own ammo? Will this law make reloading totally illegal?

Second question is enforcement. If the neighboring state does not require microstamping, what is to prevent a person from going there to buy the ammo they use for target practice? I can't believe the range is going to have to inspect each box or each cartridge to insure its a state legal round.

On constitutional grounds, I think the banning of ammo not microstamped after 2010 (for MS) would be thrown out by the courts because the government is taking property without compensation.

I hope MS citizens will convince their legislature to cancel the bill or the governor will veto the bill.


Question #1 - Reloading:
Andrew, all of the bills seem to have many clauses in common, almost as if they are cut and pasted from a template. One of these (and I'll use the Mississippi version as an exemplar, where appropriate), is that after a certain date it will be unlawful to possess ammunition which has not been 'encoded'.
Section I (2) (b) No later than January 1, 2010, all noncoded [sic] ammunition, whether owned by private citizens or retail outlets, must be disposed.

Before residents in states where this bill may be enacted are required to NOT possess 'noncoded' ammunition, it logically follows that only 'encoded' bullets can be used when reloading ammunition.

There are no provision for the manufacture and retail sale of encoded bullets.

If a bullet manufacturer would be willing to sell bulk bullets which have been encoded, it's not clear whether this will be permitted by the state. Certainly, the bullets would be significantly more expensive than those which are not encoded.

At this time, only one company has stated that they are able to micro-engrave ('encode') serial numbers on bullets. That process has not yet been proven to be reliable in practice. Whether or not it is possible ... it is (or may be) law. Manufacturers would be required to either license the process through this company and encode the bullets themselves, or ship completed bullets to that company to perform the process. Since there is unlikely to be a plethora of vendors who can/will undertake this process, it's obvious that the cost will be all the market will bear. It's problematic whether the ammunition reloaded using much-more-expensive bullets will be competitive with manufactured ammunition. Certainly it will be difficult to justify hand-loading your own ammunition, when this cost is added to whatever financial value you place on your own time at the loading bench.

But even if it turns out to be cheaper to buy manufactured ammunition than to reload your own, it may be that the ammunition you BUY is not suitable to the application for which you now reload your ammunition.

Bench-rest shooters often reload because they have better control over the manufacturing process. In USPSA, we often reload because the manufactures are unable or unwilling to reload for the niche market we represent. For example, the 9mm Major ammunition will (I predict) NEVER be produced commercially, because of the liability issues incumbent in case 'competition 9mm Major' ammunition is used in a pistol which is not designed to handle this much more powerful load. Consider also .40 S&W and .38 super, which may be available but not in the powerful load which is needed to meet USPSA 'Power' requirements.

In short, it MAY be possible that you can reload legally in these states. The cost of reloading, however, is more likely to cause you to shed a tear or two as you relegate your Open or Limited pistol, or your bench-rest rifle (remember, the term 'Assault Rifle' has not been defined), or your 3-gun rifle, to the gun safe where it can only rust into obscurity.

Question #2 - Enforcement:
How are these laws to be enforced? I can't think of any way in which a state may systematically check ammunition, unless the state is willing to bankrupt itself by either creating a Bureau of Bullet Enforcement or taking police away from their mission of preventing Real Crime.

On the other hand, if The State is so inclined there is nothing in the laws which prevent any such measures, even if the effort result in an de facto Police State. It's possible that, for the first few years, The State may run occasional 'inspections' at shooting ranges. The agents of The State can run unannounced, impromptu inspection which require shooters found there to submit their ammunition to inspection. They can pull bullets from loaded ammunition to confirm that they have been encoded. It wouldn't take a lot of public prosecutions to convince shooters that it's just too expensive to be caught with 'noncoded' bullets.

How expensive?

Looking again at the Mississippi laws, it's possible that it will result in a $1,000 fine. However, it's not beyond the realm of possibility to suppose that the state will define you as a 'manufacturer'. First offense: $1,000; Second offense: $5,000; Third offense: $10,000.

Remember, if you have EVER bought ammunition in these states -- they have your name, they have your driver's license number, they have your date of birth, they (MS) have "... All other information prescribed by the Department of Public Safety."

The "Department of Public Safety" (or whatever agency) can ask you to identify yourself. If your name is not associated with entries in their database as someone who bought ammunition in 'that' caliber from 'that' manufacturer, or if your ammunition shows signs of wear (scuffed headstamp, full finish to the brass, etc.) you can be sure that they will single YOU out for an inspection.

Again ... is it worth a $10,000 fine to risk being busted for 'noncoded ammunition'?

Question #3 - "Taking Property Without Compensation":
The State: "Who, me? I didn't take your property. I just said it's not legal for you to have 'noncoded ammunition'. What you do with it is your business. For all I know, you never had any. Or, you sold it to your cousin in Texas (which state is unlikely to every pass such a warped law) at a fat profit. No? Well, that's not my business. Next question?"

I agree with you, of course, that this is de facto confiscation. However, this is de jure a statement of legality. Any state which would pass this law would have no problem defeating any civil suit. Can you say: "My lawyer is better than your lawyer"?

I thought so.

This is a piece of exquisite legislation ... if you are a legislator who is more interested in imposing a "Brave New World" society using "Catch-22" legislation.

Think it can't happen to you?

One word:


Think it can't happen to you because ... Hey! ... you live in a strong Republican state?

Three words: Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Three more words: Barack Hussein Obama.

Not to mention John McCain (Arnie, who signed the Microstamping bill in California, endorsed McCain) and Mitt Romney.

That's right. If these bills pass the sniff-test in Indiana, Illinois and Mississippi, there's no reason to expect that similar laws won't be enacted by the Federal Government.

At this time, it doesn't matter WHO is elected president. There are no electable presidential candidates with a strong 2nd Amendment position.

The answer to all of your questions, Andrew, is that we need to establish clear communications with our state and federal legislators.

We can only hope that our brothers in these states step HARD on these very very bad bills, before they set a precedent. Don't expect the NRA to drive the protests; this isn't even on their horizon.
UPDATE: February 3, 2008:
In case I neglected to mention it (as I am certain), Maryland introduced a similar bill.

UPDATE: February 5, 2008:

Rivrdog presents a supporting view, although I don't completely agree with all of his statements.

I think that the majority of these bills will dwindle into obscurity, because they are so obviously ill-conceived and badly phrased. The text is full of logical fallacies and potential for uncontrolled governmental abuse, no responsible legislature would allow them to advance 'out of committee'.

Yet I recognize that the politicians who would sponsor such obviously fraudulent legislation have friends who are equally disprespecting of the rights of their constituents, and there is no logical reason to expect that men of ill-faith will not prevail.

Still, I do not expect that the result will be tantamount to war ... evil, demeaning, en turbulent civil war as Rivrdog suggests. On the other hand, I can see no reason why reasonable men who love their country and the freedoms it represents might not conceivably react dramatically against shameless politicians who introduce legislation, obviously designed (if not intended) to undermine the security and freedoms of our country.

In another context, I have rethought the idea that reloading may become fiscally unthinkable. The basis of this is that the idea of reloading ammunition is based upon quantity, and the amelioration of responsibility for encoding bullets in 20- or 50-round lots.

Obviously, it becomes much more profitable for the manufacturer to sell bullets in 1,000 or 4,000 round lots of 'reloading components' than to sell bullets in 50-round lots, which must become a component of small-quantity loaded ammunition. Any unit (of 20-round or 50-round lots) of loaded ammunition is subject to inspection for quality control purposes. If a single round of ammunition fails to pass the quality control inspection, the entire lot must be disposed of. Not only are material and manufacturing costs lost but the paperwork required to prove that a 'lost lot' was indeed disposed of according to (yet to be announced) must necessarily be as burdensome to the manufacturer as are incidental expenses.

However, in large quantities, if individual components of a large lot of bullets are discarded during the manufacturing process, there is little overhead involved to undermine the profit motive which necessarily drives the manufacturing process. A rebate might be required if a significant number of bullets are rejected, but that is well within the acceptable margin for error. After all, bullets in bulk are sold by the pound, and in an order of 4,000 rounds of 115 grain bullets (for example), a few missing units are not an impediment to commerce.

I suspect that, rather than completely undermining the "Hand-Loading Community", this kind of law might rather support it. It would keep the incidental cost of dross to a minimum, and thus reward the individual reloader.

Reloading your own ammunition may still, in retrospect, turn out to be more cost-effective than buying completed ammunition. Just as it is today, except that the overall cost of adhering to these egregious rules will certainly raise the cost of professionally loaded ammunition above the budgetary horizon of the casual plinker.

Of course, even if you 'roll your own', the cost of ammunition under these laws will be greater than today. We're not saying that this is a supportable concept; we're just saying that buying in bulk may still be an acceptable way to support you shooting predilection.

Wednesday, January 30, 2008

Encoded Ammunition: Mississippi

Thanks to The Shooting Wire (does not link to the specific issue), I've become aware of yet another state legislature which proposes to require 'microstamping' or (as the bill text calls it) 'serialization' of ammunition.

MISSISSIPPI: Senate Bill 2286 (Mississippi Legislature 2008 Regular Session)
Bill entered into the record on January 21, 2008

Description: Ammunition; require serial coding.

Background Information:
Disposition: Active
Deadline: General Bill/Constitutional Amendment
Revenue: No
Vote type required: Three/Fifths
Effective date: July 1, 2008

History of Actions:
1 01/21 (S) Referred To Judiciary, Division B;Appropriations

----- Additional Information -----

Senate Committee: Judiciary, Division B*, Appropriations

Principal Author: Jordan
Additional Authors: Jackson (11th), Dawkins, Powell


Bill Text in PDF

Full text of this bill (taken from the full text of the bill in html:

SECTION 1. (1) For purposes of this section, "coded ammunition" means a bullet carrying a unique identifier that has been applied by etching onto the base of the bullet projectile.

(2) (a) All handgun and assault weapon ammunition manufactured or sold in the state after July 1, 2008, shall be coded by the manufacturer.

(b) No later than January 1, 2010, all noncoded ammunition, whether owned by private citizens or retail outlets, must be disposed.

(3) (a) The Department of Public Safety shall be responsible for establishing and maintaining an Ammunition Coding System Database (ACSD) containing the following information:

(i) Register with the Department of Public Safety in a manner prescribed by the department through rule; and maintain records on the business premises for a period of seven (7) years concerning all sales, loans and transfers of ammunition, to, from, or within the state.

(ii) Register with the Department of Public Safety in a manner prescribed by the department through rule; and record the following information in a format prescribed by the Department of Public Safety:

1. The date of the transaction.

2. The name of the transferee.

3. The purchaser's driver's license number or other government issued identification card number.

4. The date of birth of the purchaser.

5. The unique identifier of all handgun ammunition or bullets transferred.

6. All other information prescribed by the Department of Public Safety.

Vendors shall also maintain records on the business premises for a period of three (3) years from the date of the recorded purchase.

(b) To the greatest extent possible or practical, the ACSD shall be built within the framework of existing firearms databases. The ACSD shall be operational no later than July 1, 2008.

(c) Privacy of individuals is of the utmost importance. Access to information in the ACSD is reserved for key law enforcement personnel and to be released only in connection with a criminal investigation.

(4) (a) Any vendor that willfully fails to comply with, or falsifies the records required to be kept by this section, is guilty of a public offense punishable by imprisonment not to exceed one (1) year and a fine of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00).

(b) Any manufacturer that fails to comply with the provisions of this section shall be liable for a civil fine of not more than One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) for a first violation, not more than Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) for a second violation, and not more than Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00) for a third or subsequent violation.

(c) Any person who willfully destroys, obliterates or otherwise renders unreadable the serialization required pursuant to this bill on any bullet or assembled ammunition is punishable by imprisonment not to exceed one (1) year and a fine of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00).

(5) (a) Establishing and maintaining the ACSD shall be funded by an end-user fee established by the Commissioner of Public Safety.

(b) There is hereby established the Coded Ammunition Fund for deposit of the end-user fees described in this section. Monies in the fund, upon appropriation, shall be available to the Department of Public Safety for infrastructure, implementation, operational, enforcement and future development costs of this section.

(c) Ammunition manufacturers based within this state may submit a one-time tax credit application for cost of purchasing ammunition coding equipment. All applications must be submitted by July 1, 2009.

SECTION 2. This act shall take effect and be in force from and after July 1, 2008.

What's significant about the Mississippi version of this bill?

(Note that not all of these points are present in bills proposed in other states; not all of these points are unique to Mississippi.)
  • There is no 'per round' fee which 'must be' added to the purchase price of the ammunition; instead, the "Ammunition Coding System Database" ('ACSD') is [5(a)]: "... funded by an end-user fee established by the Commissioner of Public Safety." This 'end-user fee' is not defined, nor are guidelines attached to the bill.
  • The requirement that [2(a)] "All handgun and assault weapon ammunition manufactured or sold in the state after July 1, 2008, shall be coded by the manufacturer ..." is a hard deadline. There are no provisions for amelioration of the restrictions imposed by this bill if either the technology to perform this coding by the manufacture is not available to meet this deadline, or if the manufactures will not or can not meet this deadline, or if the ACSD is not ready by this deadline. Essentially, if any of these sticking points are not feasible, NO ammunition will be sold in the state of Mississippi after less than six months from the introduction of this bill.
  • Within the same clause, not that "assault weapon ammunition" is included in this bill. The term is not defined. In fact, the term "handgun ammunition" is also not defined. Given that single-shot handguns have been, and will be made which are capable of firing what are traditionally considered 'rifle-caliber ammunition', almost ALL ammunition is subject to this restriction.
  • Personal identification data is recorded, and archived. Also, caliber and other 'unique identifier(s) of " ... handgun ammunition or bullets transferred" is also recorded. This is, essentially, registration of the fact that the purchaser almost certainly owns firearms of a certain caliber ... which is ipso facto registration, although the serial number, make and model of the firearm are not (in this version of the bill) required to complete a purchase.
  • The January 1, 2010 deadline for disposal of "all noncoded (sic) ammunition" may be impossible by the usual methods of shooting or selling the ammunition. This imposes a personal monetary loss to those affected, which is not subject to reimbursement by the state. No procedures are provided for disposal of this ammunition.
  • The "Coded Ammunition Fund" [5(b)] is proposed to be established by "appropriation". This vague terminology does not specifically identify a source for funding, yet it may become law. Funding, if by monies gathered by state taxation, would be a matter of law ... which may remove monies needed for other public programs. This would deprive those programs (eg: education, health & safety, police) of funding to the detriment of these programs.
  • Under clause [5(c)], "Ammunition manufacturers based within this state may submit a one-time tax credit application for cost of purchasing ammunition coding equipment." This is another burden on state tax revenue. No parameters are defined for this process, leading one to suppose that the state will be loath to actually grant the tax credit.
Another note about clause [5(c)]:

From "The Shooting Wire" newsletter, January 25, 2008 (the source of my original information):
This latest piece of legislation has to be making the folks at Winchester ammunition happy. After all, they've just opened an ammunition factory in Oxford. This latest hare-brained proposal could lead to the rapid evacuation of the plant, the loss of hundreds of Mississippi jobs and millions in tax revenues.
As we said earlier, these issues are not all unique to Mississippi ... but this one probably IS.

In common with all proposed bills of this type, though, this particular bill would have several immediate effects on the citizens of Mississippi:

  • The draconian measures proposed here would put an unbearable burden on manufacturers (both in-state and out-of-state) in a rush to meet unreasonable expectations. The cost of meeting the financial requirements would be shared by manufacturers, wholesalers and retailers but, ultimately these costs will be passed on to the individual.
  • There is NO defined advantage to the citizens of Mississippi if this bill should be passed 'as is'. In fact, the bill does not even pretend to add to the security, health, or financial well-being of the citizens of this state. On the contrary, most if not all businesses associated with firearms sales and service will be rendered defunct because no attempt has been made to protect the smooth flow of commerce.
  • On the contrary, the individual law-abiding citizen can expect only that they are unable to purchase what is otherwise a legal commodity.

There is no justification for this bill. There are no advantages for the average citizen of Mississippi to support this bill. Even those who do not personally embrace the shooting sports ... or personal defense ... stand to be harmed (both financially and in the infringement of their personal rights) by its passage. Businesses will be closed. Jobs will be lost. The tax structure of the state will be undermined.

It is easy to describe this bill (and all those like it) as a sneaky, underhanded, unprincipled back-door attack on the Second Amendment. But it goes beyond the transparency of its ultimate goal.

In effect and in fact, the secondary effects of this bill affects EVERY resident of the state, which is worth repetition if only to emphasize this point:
The authors of this bill have no concern for the well-being of the state economy. They are willing to adversely affect the state economy for the advancement of their own hidden agenda: to remove firearms from their society, whether or not this is a goal which is morally supported by the constituents of the very politicians who have proposed this bill.

A similar bill has already been enacted as law in California.

Similar bills have, within the past two weeks, been proposed in Indiana and Illinois. This is evidence of a disturbing trend by politicians and bureaucrats whose agenda can only be to impose their own personal will upon their constituents, lacking not only a mandate but even a trend suggesting that the citizens of their state want firearms ownership to be rendered moot.

This has been proven in California, whose subjects are obviously too witless or unaware to recognize how their representatives have stabbed them in the back.

It may be acceptable in Illinois, whose subjects don't seem to have mounted a protest.

Even in Indiana, it's barely feasible to believe that Hoosiers are so disinterested in their personal rights to accept this ... (words fail me) ... bill.

But Mississippi?

Why in the world would Mississippian politicians assume that their constituents would take this kind of crap without protest?

We fully accept that several politicians in Mississippi have signed their own political death-warrants with this bill, starting with the sponsor and co-sponsors of this bill.

If these liberal idiots are ever re-elected, the French may as well come to town and re-take their former colony.

Mississippi, if you let this stuff go without rioting in the streets, you don't deserve to be a member of the United States of America.

UPDATE: February 3, 2008:

In case I neglected to mention it (as I am certain), Maryland introduced a similar bill.

Tuesday, January 29, 2008

Encoded Ammunition Bills: Illinois, Indiana

Regarding the 2007 Maryland HB 1393 - "Encoded Ammunition" bill:

According to a January 25, 2008 NRA Alert:
Friday, January 25, 2008In 2007, the sponsor of “encoded ammunition” legislation in Maryland urged lawmakers across the country to introduce the same kind of legislation in their states. This legislation would require ammunition manufacturers to engrave a serial number on “the base of the bullet and the inside of the cartridge casing of each round” of ammunition for popular sporting caliber center-fire rifles, all center-fire pistols, all .22 rimfire rifles and pistols, and all 12 gauge shotguns.

This “Encoded Ammunition” legislation essentially amounts to bullet and cartridge case registration. If enacted, it would mean forfeiture of currently owned ammunition; a separate registration for every box of new ammunition; outrageously expensive ammunition costs for police and private citizens alike; and a waste of taxpayer money that could be better spent on effective police programs.

This type of highly restrictive legislation has repeatedly been proven ineffective and is opposed by BATFE and most mainstream law enforcement organizations.

We will keep you informed of any developments in your state so that you may strenuously oppose this type of legislation.

For additional information, please visit
This bill was originally scheduled, if passed into law, to be effective January 1, 2008.

As best I can determine, this bill was not enacted and, with the end of the 2007 Legislative Session, is now dead.

The NRA-ILA release does not make this clear (perhaps a disservice to its readers), but the embedded link does provide useful reference information if/when similar bills may be proposed in other state legislatures.

The "Encoded Ammunition" movement was originally proposed in the California State Assembly (see here_2005, here_2006 and here_2007), where it was ultimately approved (10/2007).

This approval was the casus belli which lead STI, in November of 2007, to announce that it would no longer sell firearms in the state of California.

Maryland had, in fact repealed existing laws concerning "comprehensive bullet identification system", characterizing it in February, 2005, as "politically motivated junk science". (!)

You may wonder why, if this bill was apparently rejected in Maryland, this article even appears here.

Illinois: the 95th General Assembly, on January 9, 2008, introduced HB4269: "Ammunition Encoding".
Statutes Amended In Order of Appearance

New Act

30 ILCS 105/5.708 new

Synopsis As Introduced
Creates the Regulated Firearms Encoded Ammunition Act and amends the State Finance Act. Provides that a manufacturer of ammunition for handguns and certain specified assault weapons sold in this State after January 1, 2009 must encode the ammunition in such a manner that the Director of State Police establishes. Provides that ammunition contained in one ammunition box may not be labeled with the same serial number as the ammunition contained in any other ammunition box from the same manufacturer. Provides that on or before January 1, 2011, an owner of ammunition for use in a regulated firearm that is not encoded by the manufacturer shall dispose of the ammunition. Provides that beginning on January 1, 2009, the Director of State Police shall establish and maintain an encoded ammunition database. Creates the Ammunition Accountability Fund as a special fund in the State treasury. Provides that subject to appropriation, the Department of State Police may use moneys from the Fund to establish and maintain the encoded ammunition database. Provides that beginning January 1, 2009, each person selling encoded ammunition at retail in this State shall collect from retail customers a fee of $0.05 for each round that is sold and delivered in this State. Establishes civil and criminal penalties for violations of the Regulated Firearms Encoded Ammunition Act. Effective January 1, 2009.
This bill was introduced on 1/09/08 by Rep. Monique D. Davis (27th Dist), read into the record and referred to the Rules Committee on the same date.

Indiana: On January 14, 2008, the Indiana General Assembly introduced HB1260, "Encoded Ammunition".



Citations Affected: IC 10-13-7.

Synopsis: Encoded ammunition. Requires ammunition manufacturers to encode all ammunition: (1) provided for retail sale in Indiana; and (2) used in handguns and assault weapons; by July 1, 2009. Prohibits a person from selling ammunition at retail after June 30, 2009, unless the ammunition has been encoded by a manufacturer. Requires the superintendent of the state police department to establish and maintain an encoded ammunition data base before July 1, 2009. Requires ammunition manufacturers and persons who sell ammunition at retail to provide certain information concerning encoded ammunition sales and persons who purchase encoded ammunition to the superintendent for inclusion in the data base. Imposes a fee of $0.05 per round on the sale of encoded ammunition that is sold at retail. Requires the fees to be deposited in the encoded ammunition data base fund to operate the data base. Requires a person who owns ammunition for a handgun or assault weapon that is not encoded ammunition to dispose of the ammunition before July 1, 2011. Makes an appropriation.

Effective: Upon passage; July 1, 2008.
Introduced to the 2008 Regular Session on 1/14/08 by Representative Crawford, who authored the bill, it was on its first reading referred to the Committee on Public Policy.

While the NRA-ILA might have mentioned the Illinois and Indiana bills in their so-called "Legislative Alert" of 1/26/08, it's possible that it was mentioned in earlier alerts. Checking the "issues" webpage, I found "ammunition" dated 2000, and "microstamping" dated 2007. Nothing in either ALERTS or ISSUES for 2008. Well, the year is young and they have more important things to thing about .. such as parking lots (2006).

This probably sounds to you as if I consider a growing trend toward state laws which literally make it impossible to abide by laws regulating the sale of ammunition to be more important than state laws which allow employers to determine whether their workers can keep firearms in their cars in the company parking lot. If so, I congratulate you on your grasp of the issues.

I do realize that the NRA and NRA-ILA have a lot of 2nd amendment issues to deal with, and they have to decide which issues they are willing to 'go to the wall' for. However, it seems to me that it is a small thing for these two organizations of "The Most Powerful Lobby in America" to at least track, identify and report on State Legislatures which introduce this kind of Draconian legislation.

Oh, by the way. You may recall that I declared myself a "Registered Gun Owner" on the night I finally joined the NRA on December 17, 2007. Today (January 29, 2008) I finally received my membership card in the mail ... along with an invitation to extend my membership for a second year.

Considering that I find myself doing the work of the NRA, in my spare time, at no cost to the NRA, the chances are that I will respectfully decline their generous offer.

UPDATE: later the same day
More January, 2008 bills in Illinois

And oh, by the way ... I have not emphasized here that Maryland introduced an "Encoded Ammunition" bill, or referred to that event in subsequent posts. Lest you forget:


Monday, January 28, 2008

Kokomo Krushes Koshes Knuts!

From USA Today: Ind. Robber Mistakenly Shoots Self in Groin

No, not in the groin:

KOKOMO, Ind. (AP) — A man accidentally shot
himself in the groin as he was robbing a convenience store Tuesday, police said.

A clerk told police a man carrying a semiautomatic handgun entered the Village Pantry demanding cash and a pack of cigarettes.

The clerk put the cash in a bag and as she turned to get the cigarettes, she heard the gun discharge.

Police say surveillance video shows the man shooting himself as he placed the gun in the waistband of his pants. The clerk wasn't injured.

A short time later, police found 25-year-old Derrick Kosch at a home with a gunshot wound to his right testicle and lower left leg.

Kosch was released from the hospital Tuesday and booked into the Howard County jail on a charge of armed robbery, criminal recklessness and battery. He is being held on a $100,000 cash bail. A jail official did not know if he had retained an attorney Wednesday.

EEEEEEE-YAAaaaaaaaaa! That's gonna smart!

You've probably read this account in other websites, and there's little I can add. I'm continually nonplussed by the incompetence of criminals, and this is just one more example.

The real story, for me, is to read the comments attached to this news story. There is a coterie of people who seem to delight in writing comments to USA Today's online news articles. If there is a punch line which you think a perfect summation ... read these comments. Someone else has already said it.

Probably, they said it better.

I certainly can't improve on it.

(Click on the link, then click SHOWING [oldest first] for the full effect.)

Sunday, January 27, 2008

An abuse victim takes the cops to court

The Real Gun Guys: An abuse victim takes the cops to court

The Real Gun Guys link to a shocking story of a Restraining Order which, despite repeated violations, threats, and assaults, was never enforced ... by a police department which was 'just across the street'.

Yes, the Lautenberg Amendment prevents (or more accurately, forbids) 'domestic abuse' perpetrators from owning a firearm. But as this story so dramatically shows, a firearms is not necessarily needed by an abuser to continue a program of attacks on those who were formerly considered "loved ones".

Yes, the police have historically been exonerated from legal obligations "To Protect, and to Serve".

Because of this specific case, that legal precedent may be reviewed. Hopefully, it will be overturned.

I understand that Law Enforcement Officers have an almost insurmountable workload, but when they can look out the front door of their police station to watch a Domestic Abuser digging the graves for his ex-wife and her children, and do nothing about it, it's obviously time to review these priorities.

Hopefully, before another throat is cut with a piece of broken glass.

Hopefully ... but not likely.

Ugly Gun Sunday

Xavier, one of my 'websites I visit every day' favorites, presented an "Ugly Gun Sunday" today. (He does that regularly, and there are so many ugly guns out there that he can't restrict himself to showing them only on Sunday!)

Here's an 'Ugly Gun' that has been making the rounds on the email circuit.

Presenting the Hello Kitty Rifle

This has been identified to me as an 'HK' (Heckler and Koch), but I'm not convinced. It looks like an AR to me.

Here's the 'breakdown' view:

(full size versions of the pictures can be seen by clicking on the high-lighted photo title.)

Happy Birthday, V.R.W.C.!

January 27 Events in History

Today may seem to you like just another Sunday, notable only for being the last day of the weekend following MLK day and [sigh] the beginning of another FIVE-day workweek. (Unless you live and work in France, in which case every week is a 4-day work burden -- if you can find a job.)

Thanks to "Brany History dot com", we learn that this is an historic day in many respects:
  • 1785 - 1st U.S. state university chartered, Athens Georgia
  • 1870 - After accepting 15th amendment, Virginia is readmitted to Union
  • 1880 - Thomas Edison patents electric incandescent lamp
  • 1894 - 1st college basketball game, University of Chicago beats Chicago YMCA 19-11
  • 1900 - Social Democrat Party of America (Debs' party) holds 1st convention
  • 1915 - U.S. Marines occupy Haiti
  • 1918 - "Tarzan of the Apes," 1st Tarzan film, premieres at Broadway Theater
  • 1926 - 1st public demonstration of television, John L Baird, London
  • 1927 - Harlem Globetrotters play their 1st game
  • 1941 - Peruvian agent Rivera-Schreiber warns of Jap assault on Pearl Harbor
  • 1945 - Russia liberates Auschwitz and Birkenau Concentration Camp (Poland)
  • 1948 - 1st tape recorder sold
  • 1951 - U.S. begins 126 nuclear tests at Nevada Test Site
  • 1965 - 1st ground station-to-aircraft radio communication via satellite
  • 1967 - Treaty banning military use of nuclear weapons in space, signed
  • 1967 - Apollo 1 fire kills astronauts Grissom, White and Chaffee
  • 1969 - 14 spies hung in Baghdad; Jews publically executed in Damascus Syria
  • 1973 - William Rogers and Nguyen Duy Trinh sign U.S. - North Vietnam treaty
  • 1977 - President Carter pardons most Vietnam War draft evaders (10,000)
  • 1988 - Senate Judiciary Committee unanimously approves nomination of Judge Anthony M Kennedy to U.S. Supreme Court
  • 1992 - President candidate Bill Clinton (D) and Genifer Flowers accuse each other of lying over her assertion they had a 12-year affair; Mike Tyson goes on trial for rape (he is found guilty)
  • 1996 - France performs nuclear test at Muruora Island
  • 1998 - First Lady Hilary Clinton blames charges that President Clinton had affairs part of a vast right-wing conspiracy
Hey, that's the big one for us VRWC members!

An American Thinker article by Bruce Walker has the details:

On Sunday, January 27, 2008, our nation celebrates an important political anniversary. Ten years ago Hillary Clinton (then the First Lady) went on television with Matt Lauer and said:

"This is the great story here for anybody willing to find and write about it and explain it is this vast right-wing conspiracy that has been conspiring against my husband since the day he announced for president."

Thus was born the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy.

Walker concludes with his own birthday wishes:
Happy tenth birthday, fellow members of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy!