Encoded Ammunition: Hawaii

According to an article in Knowledge Is Power, Hawaii has also introduced a bill requiring "Encoded Ammunition". (The link takes you to the "Hawaii Reporter", which cites the NRA as the original source and encourages readers to "... [p]lease contact the members of the House Judiciary Committee and respectfully urge them to protect the Second Amendment rights of Hawaii’s law-abiding gun owners by opposing HB2392."
________________________________________________________________
This represents the fifth state bill pertaining to "encoding ammunition" presented to a state legislature within the month of January, 2008.

The text of the bill is, in most respects, almost identical to that presented in the Mississippi state legislature during this time period.

A personal note: even before I had become aware that this bill had been proposed in Hawaii, I had begun to suspect that these bills were not being independently proposed. That is, the verbiage included in the bills includes so many similarities that it is beyond reason to presume that legislators in each of the FIVE states (Maryland, Indiana Illinois, Mississippi, and now Hawaii) woke up one morning and were struck with the thought that "Hey, I think I'll introduce a bill requiring that my state should allow only 'encoded ammunition' to be sold!"

I had expected to find some reference to this ex parte proposal on the websites of The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence (HCI), the Violence Policy Center, the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, or the Americans for Gun Safety (a broken link ... have they FINALLY 'gone under'?). Not entirely surprisingly, I found no NGO websites openly taking credit for, or acknowledging the accomplishment of a similar 'sister organization' which may have organized this assault of American 2nd Amendment Rights.

Just because you're paranoid, that doesn't mean they aren't out to get you!
Not only is the verbiage an indication of collusion, but the timing is also suspect. Every bill was introduced within a 3-week period.

This leads me to believe that a 'central source' is providing a package of gun control verbiage to state legislators across the nation. This include the text of a basic law, with hints about how it could be tailored to fit the cultural context unique to each state ... while still following the basic construct of a law which would make it financially difficult for any honest citizen to conform to the onerous requirements of the law.

Common threads to these bills [which generally reflect the stated purpose of the "Microcoding of Ammunition" law enacted in California in 2007 (October 15, 2007: Schwartzenegger signs handgun microstamp bill) ... note that this California law requires handguns to 'microstamp' information onto the base of cartridges, NOT that the ammunition must include an 'encoded' serial number on the bullet!] include:

• A short time span during which the law is to be enacted ... typically within 6 months to one year of introduction of the bill;
• Only "Encoded Ammunition" may be sold in the state within 6 months of introduction of the bill;
• Only "Encoded Ammunition" may be OWNED in the state within 12 months of introduction of the bill;
• Penalties for ownership of "noncoded" [sic] ammunition to be $1000 fine for vendors (or private citizens") after stated deadlines;
• Penalties for manufacture of "noncoded" [sic] ammunition to be $1000 fine for "manufacturers" of ammunition after stated deadlines for the first offense, $5000 for the second offense, $10,000 for the third offense;
• No definition of "Manufacturer", no provision to protect those who "hand load" or "reload" their own ammunition, no reason why private citizens who reload their own ammunition should not be considered as a "Manufacturer" of ammunition within this law;
• No provision for delay of enaction of the law, or for delays of penalties under the law, if circumstances preclude development of technology which would definitively support this law, or if problems developed in finding a vendor which can reliably or accurately (or economically!) perform the "encoding" of ammunition;
• Imposition of a tax (from 5 cents to 0.005 cents per round) imposed on purchase of "encoded ammunition", purported to support the infrastructure necessary to fund a 'database' or 'tracking system' to be developed by the state to record ammunition transfers;
• No provision to fund, or establish, a method of Enforcement of this law or, otherwise a process to restrict draconian measures to enforce the law.

There are a plethora of other failures of these bills to adequately (1) address potential unreasonable impositions upon legal owners of firearms, or (2) provide for Second Amendment rights which are supposedly protected from unreasonable search or seizure, or imposition of unrealistic fines or penalties, or (3) address obvious potential problems which may make this bills an unreasonable burden of citizens who may reasonably expect that their state legislatures might otherwise have the best interests of their otherwise law-abiding citizens as a primary concern.

To my surprise, Hawaii has protested against this bill in a "Testimony" (February 1, 2008) authored by "Mark J. Bennett, Attorney General or Lance M. Goto, Deputy Attorney General"

In this Testimony, the following comments are significant:

The Department of the Attorney General respectfully opposes this measure.

The purpose of this bill is to require all ammunition of specified caliber manufactured or sold in Hawaii that is capable of use in handguns, including assault pistols, to be coded to assist law enforcement in identifying and prosecuting offenders who use firearms in the commission of crimes. The bill also requires the Department of the Attorney General to establish a statewide database to track coded ammunition.

While the concept of maintaining a database to enable law enforcement to trace ammunition used in the commission of heinous crimes back to a certain criminal is a commendable one, we believe there are legal and practical problems presented by this bill that prevent the workable implementation of such a concept. This bill may be an instance where a firearm measure is unduly burdensome.

The concept of a bill which is "... unduly burdensome ..." may be foreign to some state legislators, but apparently it is not inconceivable to the Attorney General of Hawaii. Although the firearms ownership restrictions in Hawaii are often more strict ... or restrictive ... than those which are prevalent in other states, the Hawaiian Attorney General's Office seems to know a Bad Bill when he sees one. We applaud both gentlemen for their reluctance to impose a Bad Bill upon their fellow citizens, and note that the bill has been 'deferred', which is the bureaucratic equivalent of saying "Talk To The Hand!"

For details of the bill, go here. The discerning reader will note similarities to the Mississippi bill (full-text version), except that some lip-service has been paid in Hawaii to tax relief which the sponsors apparently felt were necessary to protect retailers in Hawaii.

UPDATE: February 3, 2008:
In case I neglected to mention it, Maryland introduced a similar bill.

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.
andrewp1040 | | Email | Homepage | 01.31.08 - 5:18 pm | #

__________________________________________________

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:

California

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.

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

Title: AN ACT RELATING TO FIREARMS AND AMMUNITION REQUIRING THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY TO ESTABLISH A STATEWIDE DATABASE TO TRACK CODED AMMUNITION MANUFACTURED AND SOLD FOR HANDGUNS AND ASSAULT RIFLES; AND FOR RELATED PURPOSES.

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.

SUMMARY:

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.

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 http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?id=227&issue=005.

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".

HOUSE BILL No. 1260

_____

DIGEST OF INTRODUCED BILL

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:

MARYLAND DID IT TOO!

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.)

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!

Rollerblading like you've never seen

Sometimes you can't just jump into something.

This young Korean girl takes her time setting up what turns out to be an incredible performance.

Why should Ice Skaters have all the moves?

glumbert - Korean Freestyle Slalom Rollerblading

People, not guns, are the problem

People, not guns, are the problem

It has been said many times, not the least of which is here, but somehow it seems to ring with a more powerful appeal here ... at the ultra-liberal, ultra-antigun Seattle Post Intelliger OPINION section.

Laurel S. Barton, 'guest columnist', states the facts and not the anti-gun spin:

Body counts garner attention from the media like a flashy neon sign. They create buzz, such as Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels' gun control stance that quotes the figure of 550 violent firearms crimes in 2005 ("Seattle weighs in on handgun ban," Wednesday).

Most people will be horrified and will fail to ask the crucial, underlying question: How many of those guns were purchased legally? After all, laws will affect guns legally acquired, not those from secondary sources. The answer: 15 percent of guns used in crimes are legally obtained. That leaves 85 percent unaffected by changes to gun control laws.

...

The Second Amendment was not an invention by its author, James Madison. It has a long common-law history, a history that afforded this nation the ability to defeat the British during the Revolutionary War. Moreover, in 1856, almost 100 years after the Bill of Rights, the Supreme Court affirmed the interpretation of the Second Amendment in the Dred Scott decision, stating every man has the right "to keep and carry arms."

The problem in this country is not gun control, it's the people. That's right: you. The foundational documents were written with faith in its people. That we were the safest reservoir for absolute power to reside in, and that, if we were not free-thinking enough to exercise that power correctly, the solution was not to take power away, but to educate.

Perhaps the most telling comment in Barton's screed is:

Mommy government is not always going to be there to protect you.

This is the basic credo which is often overlooked in PI-Land.

"Mommy Government" ... essentially, Socialism ... is an attempt to establish The State as the ultimate arbiter of the public good. That is, it puts The State not only as the first and last resource for protecting its citizens, but the ONLY means by which we can be protected from each other.

As we have found to be true with every other bureaucracy, and every other government program, it just doesn't work.

Witness Russia, Zimbabwe, and every socialist state in history.

News - Sheriff cracking down on gun permits - sacbee.com

From the Sacramento Bee:

Sacramento County Sheriff John McGinness has revoked concealed weapon permits of a gubernatorial appointee and a state parole official while also vowing to overhaul permit record keeping, both in the wake of a Bee investigation.

Syd, at the Snub Nose Press.

The sheriff's office noted that both public officials for had been cited for driving under the influence (DUI), found that they had Concealed Carry Permits (CCP), and yanked their carry licenses.

McGinness said he canceled both permits because the holders displayed questionable judgment.

"Generally, a DUI conviction on your record should be presumed to be a disqualifier," for a concealed gun permit, he said.

The Sheriff's Department can allow people to carry a loaded gun if they have "good moral character" and prove they have "good cause" for needing a gun, according to state law. But the state grants leeway to local law enforcement in determining which applicants fit those definitions.

I think this was an appropriate action. Possession of a CCP (known in Oregon, under technically different legislative action as a Conceal Handgun License, or CHL) implies that the recipient is trusted to demonstrate responsible judgment under all circumstances. In these cases, the possession of a handgun was not a factor in the violation; however, the violation of law serves to demonstrate that the licensee was not morally or legally responsible.

Holding CCP bearers to a higher standard seems entirely appropriate, in this litigious society.

However, the state law obviously is less inclusive than a 'shall issue' standard. To continue from the previous quote:

The Sheriff's Department can allow people to carry a loaded gun if they have "good moral character" and prove they have "good cause" for needing a gun, according to state law. But the state grants leeway to local law enforcement in determining which applicants fit those definitions.

Despite that, The Bee's investigation found a number of questionable calls, including permits granted for such needs as carrying a lot of money or wearing expensive jewelry. A bounty hunter received a concealed weapon permit even though he had been accused of domestic violence and had been subject to a temporary restraining order – although he was never convicted of a crime.

[Ed: emphasis added]

...

The Bee's review found that [former Sacramento County Sheriff] Blanas had issued a concealed weapon permit to a campaign contributor who bought a vacation home with him and to a couple who contributed cash and liquor to his campaigns, who were allowed to complete their gun training at the department's officer-only range.

In a 'shall issue' state, such as Oregon, patrimony and political contributions are not considered. If a citizen here can show that he is of good moral (and legal) character, with certain other restrictions, and can provide signed testaments to that effect and proof of hangun training, the county 'shall issue' the permit. That is, there is no requirement to establish a 'need' to carry a concealed weapon. That 'need' clause is rife with possibilities to abuse, and is not necessary. In a free society, an honest citizen should not be required to state the circumstances under which he 'needs' to carry a weapon. The very fact of rampant predation in all 50 states should suffice. More, the 2nd amendment supports the 'shall issue' clause.

Compare this to the 'need' to vote, and the ways in which voter qualification laws have historically been abused in the interest of preventing the Negro vote.

We don't have to establish a 'need' to vote, or to possess the right to defend ourselves; those rights are acknowledged in the Constitution.

In 1964, while a college student (under 21 years of age!), I applied for and was 'granted' a Concealed Carry License by a sheriff in Oregon on the grounds that I worked in the summer months as a traveling salesman, carrying cash. My 'need' was, in fact, legitimate. But I traveled 12 months of the year, and my 'need' was as great as a student traveling between college and my parental home on weekends ... but I couldn't get a license to carry without demonstrating that the possible risk of theft was a legitimate justification for the ability to defend myself.

I found that irksome 44 years ago, and resented that the State required me to acquiesce to the concept that the 'need' to protect my employer's money was more important than my 'need to protect my private person.

I resent it still.

USMC Silent Drill Platoon

Except for the time when they are throwing their M14's back and forth, the entire drill is performed with fixed bayonets. No commands are issued during the drill.



Sondra k

850 rounds through an M-60

You may not be familiar with the M60 machine gun. It was almost exclusively a Viet Nam War weapon of the U.S. Military, and while Infantry is known as "The Queen of Battle", the M60 may be considered the "Queen Consort of Battle".

This crew-served weapon was expected expected to lay down a 'base of fire' in any engagement, and it was well designed for that purpose. This belt-fed weapon fired 600 rounds of 7.62 (.308) ammunition per minute. Weighing just (!) 17 pounds, it was capable of laying down what was popularly called 'a wall of steel' (even though it fired copper-jacketed lead bullets, of course) upon the enemy while support troops either maneuvered to engage the enemy from the flanks, or (as a fixed-defense weapon) the support troops engaged the 'leakers' .. those enemy which avoided its deadly kill-zone .. with their M-16 personal weapons.

Much lighter than the M2 .50 Caliber machine gun, this weapon did not require a tripod mounting device to set it up for engagement. The gun was typically carried with the bipod retracted. In the event that the unit found itself in a 'hasty ambush' ... no warning, the unit walked into an ambush and was unable to establish a 'safe' position for the gun ... the M60 could be fired from the hip, as it was usually carried on a combat sling which facilitated its use while the gunner was standing.

Give only a few moments, the gunner could drop to the prone position, deploy the integral bipod support, and provide an immediate 100 rounds of supporting fire. (The bun was carried with a 100-round belt mounted, with the excess belt-length supported by a canvas 'bag'.)

The assistant gunner (AG) carried either 100 or 200 rounds in a linked belt on his person. In a meeting engagement, there was sufficient time for the AG to connect his carry-ammo with the gunner's carry belt so that the machine gun had 300 rounds of 'immediate action' ammunition.

Because this was a major-caliber fun ( .308 compared to the .22* caliber of the M16 carried by most of an infantry company/platoon/squad), this gun was able to pour a solid stream of fire into any enemy ambush position, early establishing a dominating base of fire to overwhelm the enemy's pre-planned ambush.

The only drawback was that after approximately 300 rounds, the barrel would heat up to the point where this air-cooled weapon was unable to further shed excess heat. At that point the screw-in barrel would first turn red-hot ... and the gun would 'cook off' ammunition so that the runner was unable to cease firing without breaking off the belt-fed ammunition.

If this did not happen, the gun would continue to fire to the point at which the barrel would be sufficiently hot that it would turn white, and then discontinue firing because the barrel actually malformed, causing a malfunction in firing.

Changing the barrel (after the approximately 300 rounds) required the gunner to have in his immediately accessible possession an asbestos-based glove with which he could grab the hot barrel, give it a quarter-turn clockwise to disengage it, and discard the hot barrel. A machine gun crew was expected to ALWAYS have a spare replacement barrel. Unfortunately, in the heat of combat (sorry for the pun), the crew didn't always have the presence-of-mind to replace the barrel before the gun locked up. The result is that the gun was often put out-of-service not because it was knocked out by the enemy, but because it was no longer servicable due to heat build-up.

S.A.W.
In the Middle-East (the "Gulf War"), these limitations were deemed unnecessary. While war in Viet Nam, with its predominantly jungle environment required a heavy bullet to penetrate foliage which was being used by the enemy as cover, the essentially desert environment of the Middle East reduced the need for a heavy-bullet machine gun.

Instead of evolving the M60 (7.62mm) to the next generation, the decision was to evolve the M16 (5.56mm). One distinct advantage was that more rounds of ammunition could be carried per pound of load weight, and it wasn't usually necessary to designate an 'assistant gunner' (or 'ammo carrier') for this weapon. Instead of being a crew-served weapon appropriate to platoon-sized or heavier engagements, the SAW was appropriate to squad-size engagements. There was no perceived need to carry a 'brush buster' round; a magazine-fed fully-automatic weapon with a limited initial ammunition supply (~20 rounds) was deemed sufficient unto the tasks for which it was require.

Some of the advantages of this approach were:

• SAWs require less training than medium or heavy automatic weapons. Fully automatic weapons require large amounts of expensive live-fire training before troops learn to actually hit targets while not wasting ammunition. SAW doctrine reduces training costs by limiting advanced training to a few picked specialists, usually the men who carry the weapon and its spare ammunition.
• SAWs are more effective than assault rifles in fully automatic mode. Hand-held fully automatic fire is difficult to control and is less likely to hit an incapacitating part of the enemy's anatomy. A SAW usually has a bipod, which permits the operator to rest the weapon on the ground or other object, increasing stability and reducing operator fatigue.
• SAWs are more reliable than assault rifles under intense firing. A practical assault rifle needs to be lightweight, and is therefore prone to overheat or malfunction under the stresses of continuous fully automatic fire. Because it is carried by a specialist with a specialized pack load, a SAW can have a heavier barrel and a sturdier action without unduly burdening the entire squad.

This was 'good theory', but in practice the advent of Urban Warfare again showed that heavy bullets provided the penetration needed for effective assault-type warfare. Also, the ability to fire a HUGE number of rounds spoke in favor of an M60-type light machine gun ... except for the niggling problem of rapid overheating.

Enter the improved metallurgy of the 21st Century M60 machine gun.

This gun is able to fire 850+ rounds of ammunition in a very short time, without the need to change the barrel. The overall design hasn't changed significantly since 1960, because it is now able to meet a newly defined mission statement:

"Put a lot of heavy rounds downrange, quickly, without a debilitating maintenance overhead."

The new version of the M60 machinegun performs so well that it meets that minimal requirement handsomely. Yes, it IS a 'crew-served' weapon, if only because the gun cannot be uses to its maximum potential without an assistant-gunner to feed the weapon to the limit of its capabilities. It's still a 17-pound weapon, and carrying the gun with a 'ready action' ammunition in excess of 100 rounds is still a debilitating burden on the gunner.

But with an assistant gunner whose only duties are the (a) feed the gun, and (b) protect the gunner, this new-and-improved light machinegun seems likely to meet mission requirements which have yet to be fully defined in a combat environment.


One thing is sure: the new and improved M60 can not only lay down a daunting 'base of fire', but it can hold its position for a significant period of time, but it can dominate the battleground during that period.


Fifteen THOUSAND rounds? Woof!
(DOWNLOAD this 3mb file here.)

The Hobo Brasser

Kids, don't try this at home!

From a blogger known as "Dishhead", here's a cautionary tale of a Negligent Discharge at the loading bench.



Be aware that this website includes a lot of close-ups of the gunshot wounds. They are not for the squeamish, and perhaps NSFW (Not Safe For Work)

In his blog, he said he had been installing a new grip safety in his 1911 .45acp (Federal Hydro Shok ammunition", and was testing the safety when a loud noise startled him. Then he realized he was bleeding. Then the pain came.

He had a through-and-through in his right thigh above the knee, and then another through-and-through in his calf. Apparently, he didn't break any bones ... but there are some pieces of the bullet remaining in his leg.

"I got so used to handling guns and taking them apart and putting them together that safety measures became automatic." he said.

There are a lot of unanswered questions here, among them: "how did you end up with a loaded 1911 when you had just installed a Grip Safety? Surely you didn't work on the gun with a magazine inserted."

I'm grateful to Dishhead for posting this information. I know he's embarrassed, but a dedicated blogger will write about a personal event of this magnitude no matter the personal consequences. It not only illustrates the need to avoid a lackadaisical attitude when handling firearms, but it's a sure and certain way to increase traffic at your blog!

(Sorry, that last was rude but I couldn't resist the temptation.)

Or, as The Hobo Brasser delights in telling me:
"It may be that your purpose in life is to serve as a horrible example."

Dishhead has been updating this article daily. I'll certainly stay tuned to learned whether he is the luckiest man alive.



Xavier Thoughts wrote about this today, thanks for the link.

UPDATE:

When I was talking to SWMBO tonite, describing the incident, she said: "I bet he has a flat spot on his forehead from pounding himself with his fist, saying 'stupid! stupid! stupid! "

We all know how easy it is to find ourself in that situation. Been there, done that ... but without the blood and the pain. Just the embarrassment.

I'm personally gratified to learn that I'm not the only reloader whose loading bench is the centerpiece in a disastrously messy work area.

Heller via WSJ

Misfire at Justice - WSJ.com

Perhaps one of the most concise and cogent discussions of the fall-out from the DC Gun Ban lawsuits I've seen.

It fits well with my own commentary in that it offers a rationalization of Clement's Amicus brief. But it goes far beyond by considering the "legal standard applied by Judge Silberman".

For additional thought-provoking commentary, see this piece in Human Events.


Links to both articles from David Codrea in War Against Guns, and if you're not reading his blog every day you're missing a blog which I think so much of that I've moved the sidebar link to "Blogs I Read Every Day".

For me, that's something.

Wake Up America?

Rivrdog links to a hi-tech video urging Americans to "wake up!"

Right-wing fear mongering?

Overblown hyperbole?

A timely call for action?

As Fox News says: "We report, you decide"

Journalists as Clergy

The Smallest Minority, one of my favorite reads, spent Sunday (and also Friday, Thursday, Wednesday and just maybe Tuesday) writing about Political Bias in American Journalism.

It goes without saying that this is a Geek-Length essay. Kevin obviously agrees with my personal credo, that any subject worth discussing is worth dissecting. And dissect he does, with references to books by such journalistic outcasts as Bernard Goodman and John Stossel.

In keeping with the essential 2nd amendment flavor of this blog, the NRA is prominently featured (as are AARP and ACLU). Not to mention the NY Times and the Washington Post. et al the Liberal Print Media.

Favorite quotes:

. "Note that we move here well beyond the notion of mere gun control and into the realm of general social control, management and regulation."

. "Perhaps the most pervasive way in which journalists are different from normal people is that journalists live in a world dominated by government, and they reflexively see government action as the default way to approach any problem."

. "Of the five groups, NRA necessarily anchors the negative end. The very existence of the potential for uncoordinated violence represented by guns is a threat to an administrative control hermeneutic. Guns simply invite administration. "

. "At the top of the scale, HCI represents the essence of the administrative hermeneutic. It stands for scientific management or rational control and regulation of a problem quite often framed as a general public health concern."

. "Although I had accurately anticipated the reluctance of NRA officials in releasing information about the activities of their organization, I did not anticipate a general reluctance and the outright refusal of some journalists to explain their activities. Most of the journalists would not return calls when they were contacted and asked to participate in the study. Callbacks did not help. Neither did assurances of anonymity help to reverse the refusals. The non-response rate, thus defined, is almost 95 percent."

Essentially, journalists see themselves not only as members of a profession, the goal of which is "... disseminating and interpreting the administrative word and its symbols unto the public." They may not have written the gospel, but ... hey, wait a minute; they did and they still do.

January Personals

Randomly Hittin' Witten
My old friend, former IPSC shooter and current Shotgunner, dog-trainer without peer and BBG Master Randy wrote today to say that he's looking for someone who will build him a "cutting edge website" for his business.

I put him in touch with another friend, Brian, who (among other accomplishments) is the webmaster for the Albany Rifle & Pistol Club.

Only trouble is, Brian lives in Albany and Randy lives in Portland. It's less than 100 miles, but Brian may not have the time nor the inclination to commute for the personal conferences which such enterprises inevitably require.

So if you're a web designer in the Portland, Oregon area, or you can recommend someone who is, please email at the addy on the pickup tailgate (bottom of this page).

_____________________________________________________________

New Hardware

SWMBO gifted me with some new computer hardware this Christmas, and tonite I finally plugged them into the Mighty Geek Puter.

First was an ACER 20" LCD Monitor.
I was concerned about installing this, because my computer table is a roll-top desk. I wasn't as much worried about the footprint (my old 19" DELL ViewSonic weighs a ton and takes up more depth than width) as I was about the ease of installation. I was pleasantly surprised to see that the new monitor sits far enough back that I could dig the keyboard out of the keyboard drawer, put it on the desktop (which is at a much more comfortable height) and still have bare desk left over.

Next was a Logitech MX1000 Laser Cordless Mouse.
I haven't actually installed this one yet. But I did all the 'advance work (opened the box, plugged the recharging dock into a power source, put the mouse in the dock to charge.) It has been an hour, and looking at the indicator lights on the mouse I see that it is 'fully charged'. But I don't want to switch to the new mouse quite yet, because as long as I'm using my MicroSoft corded laser mouse, I don't have to reboot.

SWMBO chose this particular mouse because she loves me like crazy. Either that, or I'm driving her crazy complaining about the cord. (As far as I'm concerned, either rationale is acceptable as long as I get rid of the *&@#$! cord, man!)

One of the problems with having a roll-top desk for a computer table is that the mousepad almost necessarily rests on a pull-out 'breadboard' on either side. That's convenient, sure. You can be either left-hand or right-hand dominant, and the mouse is equally close to hand.

But the stinkin' cord, when you push the mouse 'up', gets caught in the gap between the breadboard and the face of the desk. The result is a hang-up, as I try to tug the cord out of the space which I have cleverly named the 'mousetrap'. Actually, I usually call it the *&@#$! mousetrap.

This SHOULD solve the problem because there is [DUH!] not cord. Therefore, there is no *&@#$! mousetrap.

I'll let you know tomorrow how this works out. But I'm already in love with the new cordless laser mouse (don't let nobody sell you a mouse that isn't laser, 'cause that is the Jones, I'm tellin' you!)

The only drawbacks that I can see are:

1. you have to get use to the feel of a new mouse, which totally screws your Minesweeper stats;
2. you have to put the mouse in the charging dock at the end of every puter session;
3. I have NO idea if the mouse can spend as much time on the puter without recharging as I can;
4. since the recharging dock plugs into the same power bar as the puter, I can no longer turn off the master switch when I'm done working for the night. I can only turn off the power switch for the PC.

That last isn't such a big deal. I just have to learn new habits. Since the BlueBird of Happiness burned my last PC, I've become a Belt AND Suspenders guy about protecting my PC from power surges. Fortunately, I recognize that I am obsessive and I can probably convince myself that I can go to sleep at night with only ONE power switch protecting my PC from burnout.

And no, it isn't easy being me.
__________________________________________________

I'm not going t0 do THAT again!

For personal reasons, I chose to spend my 3-day MLK-day holiday weekend driving to Baker City, Oregon.

I was confident that I could [ahem] weather the weather, and it's not as if I'm unaccustomed to driving in snow. Also, I was confident that the I84 freeway would be relatively snow-free, as Oregon may not do a lot of 'good things' but they know how to keep the Interstate Freeways open.

How else are Californians going to import their beer here?

I drove the 385 miles to Baker City in 7 hours. Simple. Put the charge-o-meter (cruise control) on '70'm, drive until the gas-o-meter (fuel gauge) reads 1/4 tank left. Gas up. Drive the rest of the way.

I left at 11am, after prudently buying a set of tire chains from Les Schwab (if you don't use them, Les will buy them back next summer ... it's a policy of essentially free tire chains over the winter. Les made a fortune with this kind of policies.) The freeway was dry all the way. I pulled in to the Oregon Trail Motel at 6pm, got my room and dinner at the attached restaurant at 8pm ...and it was snowing.


When I got up the next morning, the landscape was filled with snow and my Damned Old Ford was black on the bottom, white on the top.

I took care of my business, waited until 11am to start my trip back. My hope was that the freeway traffic would have cleared the freeway of enough snow that the pavement would be clear of snow.



This was only partly true.

As I approached the first range of mountains, I saw a line of trucks pulled off to the shoulder of the freeway, chaining up.

The country to the side was beautiful in its snowy mantle, but I was having problems. The 19 degree weather had frozen my windshield wipers (not replaced since I bought the Damned Old Ford in July of 2006), and trucks passing me were kicking up muddy slush ... which I could not remove. The windshield washers, of course, were frozen up, the nozzles clogged. This did not change all day.


At the bottom of the other side of that small mountain range, there was another line of class-8 trucks, wearily removing their tire chains because there was too much bare pavement; that breaks tire chains, they had no choice.

After I passed La Grande (a major town in these here parts), I continued on I84 over the BGlue Mountains. There was a sign posted to the effect that "Chains Are Required For Vehicles Over 10,000 Pounds And For All Towing Vehicles". Yup, you guessed it. Another line of semis chaining up along the road.


The next 40 miles was Forty Miles of Bad Road. Part of the roadway was clear, due to previous traffic. That will break chains, as was evident by the occasional pile of broken tire chains on the roadway. It looked like like the trail of a dyspeptic chain monster, who shat chains every few miles. And of course, the 10 freeway miles past La Grande was crowded by truckers who had wearily pulled off the main road to chain up again.

The last 10 miles in the mountains, though, around the vicinity of Meacham, was Trucker Hell. There was no bare pavement, no visibility, and no forgiveness. Just mile after mile of 6 percent downgrade, weak guardrails to keep us from sliding off the road, and we all ... me, and the truckers ... understood why chains WERE required for traversing this Hell Ride.

It took me three hours to drive the 96 miles between Baker City and Pendleton. The last ten mile .. after the end of Killer Hill (nobody ever officially renamed 'Cabbage Hill", originaly named for the Skunk Cabbage plants which populate the roadside during the summer months) were clear of snow. But it's worth the moment to go back and review the road.

There's a place just before Cabbage Hill on this freeway, part of the original Oregon Trail, which is called "Dead Man's Pass". Much like the Donner Party, a wagon train in the 1860's was said to have been snowbound during an ill-timed winter crossing, with many members of the party freezing to death. This was only a historic site in my mind before today. I grew up in this country, and the place never seemed too daunting to me.

That day, though, I was ready to believe that people had died because of the weather. There were no (or few) bare patches on the freeway. Every inch was a slippery, snowy hell.

I quit taking pictures at this point. Too scary to drive, let alone use only one hand on the steering wheel.

After 3 hours, I completed the 96 miles to Pendleton ... where I bought new windshield wipers, and a squeegee to clean my windshield (since the windshield washers were frozen). I drove only another 90 miles to Biggs Junction where I forted up for the night and tried to get some sleep. I was completely burned out due to driving in adverse road conditions.


The next morning, after spending the night in the parking lot, my Damned Old Ford was still redolent in its coat of road grime, frozen muddy slush, and icicles from Hell.

I washed the car before I got home. No telling how much salt had been applied to the road surface; no sense in chancing rust on the car after my naturally sanguine nature had been so thoroughly erroded.

Hell ride, for sure.

The next time I drive to Baker City, it will be high summer and the temperature will be in the nineties. I don't need this slush crap!

We're not doing that any more!

Higbie and Stan both sent me this video. Higbie sent it without comment. Stan suggested that there was a lesson to be learned here. Perhaps so.






Money quotes:

First guy: "We're not doing that any more!"

Second guy: "Nope, no more iron.

Third guy: "No more?

I'm guessing that the third guy wasn't the shooter.

You can also see (and download) the video here.