The Buttoned Down Mind of your Anti-Gun Friends

Raging Against Self Defense: A Psychiatrist Examines The Anti-Gun Mentality, By Sarah Thompson, M.D.

I had discovered, and read, this article a couple of years ago, but I lost track of it and never gave myself a chance to recommend it. Thanks to a link in the Comments section of an article by "Geek With A .45", I've found it again. I've reread it, and I can recommend it to you.

Taken by itself, it's a powerful insight into the reasons why some people unthinkingly assume that anyone who owns a gun is a danger to society. Words like 'rage', 'Projection' and 'Denial' are key to the understanding. Dr. Thompson also includes suggestions about how to present yourself as a sane, responsible member of society even though you do own a gun. The goal seems to be to convince anti-gun friends that people who own and shoot firearms aren't necessarily dangerous; by extension, guns aren't inherently evil.

I admit to some reserve in embracing the interpersonal techniques she suggests. I'm sure they can work, but I'm not convinced that 'just everyone' can use these conversational techniques in a successful attempt to diffuse the firm convictions of my friends.

Among my co-workers, I have one who is interested in shooting, and I took him to the range one weekend where he had a great time burning up a lot of ammunition. He wasn't someone who needs to be convinced; I was able to show him how to safely handle firearms, but mostly it was just a nice day at the range which we both enjoyed.

Another co-worker (and I'm sure I've mentioned this story before, too), wandered by my desk at the end of the day when I was discussing shooting with the fellow I just described. This second co-worker mentioned "I've never seen any reason for anyone to own a gun. I've never even seen one, let alone shot one." I didn't try to convince him of anything, although I did say that this was his choice, but I enjoy shooting and I've been competing at shooting matches for decades. Since I've never shot anybody in my office, I figured that was about all I needed to say. The implication was that some people do have a reason to own a gun, and it's one which he might accept. I haven't said another word about shooting guns to him, and we remain friendly.

Still another co-worker knows that I compete in shooting matches most weekends. I've described the experience in casual conversation, noted that it's a fun activity which both I and SWMBO enjoy as much for the company of good people as for the excuse to go to the range. Most Friday afternoons she asks me if I'm going to a match this weekend, or on Monday she asks if I HAVE gone to a match. The resulting conversation is much like that between colleagues who say to each other "so, did you go see that movie you were talking about?"

I consider that a healthy collegial relationship. She spends her weekends picking up trash from the Oregon beaches or working in her garden; I spend my weekends blasting holes in cardboard targets. Everybody had a good time, either enjoyed or suffered inclement weather, and we're all just good people.

The most significant story about "convincing an anti-gunner that guns and gunners aren't evil" is, probably the "How My Sweetie Learned To Love Shooting."

My Beloved SWMBO grew up in a gun-free zone. Her father, a lay preacher, never allowed (or had reason to) a gun in the house. She, too, grew up with the understanding that "there is never any reason for a person to own a gun." It wasn't something that was discussed; it was just understood.

After we met, and began dating, we soon spent every weekend together. We lived in different towns, so I would spend Friday night driving to her home ... bringing my range gear with me.

On Saturday Morning I would be found hauling my range gear out her door to the car, on my way to the match. We would say goodbye at the door, and I would say "you know, you're invited." She would always say "yeah, right" and I would be off to spend 8 or 10 hours at the range, or in travel. She would spend most of the day doing whatever she had planned.

After a bit over a year, she said: "I'm getting sick of this. We're together because we like being together, but it's only a couple of days each week and I'm tired of being left alone half of my weekend. Let's go to the match together."

Her perception of "people-who-shoot" was (predictably) a bunch of red-necked yahoos who spent the day at the range shooting at everything, and then sat on the pickup tailgate for a couple of hours drinking beer and shooting casually at random targets while cursing volubly.

She was surprised when she met a lot of clean-cut guys, and a few women, who treated each other with respect and treated Range Safety and Gun Handling as Gospel. More, the treated her and each other with respect ... modified by good-natured kidding. It was like being a golf match, except for picking up expended brass.

She came to know the competitors socially, and learned that she liked them. Except for the picking-up-the-brass thing.

After another year of going to matches, and picking up a lot of brass, she finally announced to me "Hey! I'm tired of picking up everybody's brass. Get me a gun, show me how to do this thing. I want to see these guys pick up MY brass!"

SWMBO has been much more comfortable at matches as a competitor than as a hanger-on.

For a while, she worried about people who may expect her to 'do well'. She didn't want them to think she was competitive, she just wanted to go shooting for the fun of it.l

Then, for a while, she was worried about people who had stared shooting after she did, but they were scoring higher in the order-of-finish than she did. So we got her better guns, spent some time training her until, for example, she realized that "Steel Is My Friend" ... and I stepped quietly out of the way and let other people take charge of her training.

Now she trains other ladies, in her spare time.)(

Then she got competitive. She would shoot a stage, then I would shoot it differently and do better, and she would say "Hey! Why didn't you tell me that was a better way to shoot the stage?!!" We went through iterations where I would coach her, and she would seem to take offense. Then I didn't coach her, and she would take offense. Eventually, she started doping the stages on her own, trying to find the best approach which made the best use of her own personal skills set, and she started moving up the 'order of finish' score sheet.

I would like to say that today SWMBO is entirely independent, dopes the stages to her personal best advantage, and regularly kicks my butt. Can't do that; she frequently beats me on the individual stage, she enjoys what she is doing, and she likes the people we shoot with. That she is unwilling to invest in practice time to the point where she regularly beats me is a personal decision, and I can't fault her for it.

I can only say ... she enjoys shooting, she performs to her expectations usually ( as I do, usually) and she had met new friends At The Range who are as important to her as they are to me.


The point is, this lady who "never knew a reason why anyone would want to own a gun" now loves to shoot, has her own guns (and is better trained in gun-handling techniques than 99.99% of everyone in the world) , has expanded her personal horizons, and looks forward to weekends when she can spend at least one day in a gravel pit with her friends.

Me?

I'm ecstatic. I don't really enjoy going to a match without her, even though I did so for 15 years in competition. It's just not as much fun without my sweetie, my lover, my very best friend. Our relationship is much stronger for our shared interest, and I thank God for the day when she decided that she decided that she didn't want to be left behind any more.

Here's the bottom line:
(1): Just because someone "doesn't know why someone would want to own a gun" doesn't mean that they can't enjoy the experience.
(2): ... uhhhh .. see (1).

Campus Carry in The Washington Gulag

The War On Guns has an information-rich article on two bills being considered by the Washington (the state, not the district) legislature.

SB6841 (click here for full text), introduced January 28, 2008 by Senators Murray, Jacobsen, Kline, Shin, Kohl-Welles, is scheduled for a Public Hearing on February 7.

The bill makes it unlawful to carry a firearm (including a spring-loaded BB gun) onto the grounds or facilities of a "institution of higher education". That would be a college, University ... no word yet whether it includes a trade school.

Violation of this law would be treated as a "Gross Misdemeanor". Okay, it's not a felony; it's just a way of creating a Gun Free Zone, with some teeth in it.

Well, imprisonment for a "Gross Misdemeanor", whatever the term of incarceration, isn't the only penalty. They've added some frills.

They can kick you out of school (if you're a student). Don't expect to be reimbursed for your tuition, and/or say sayonara to any scholarships you may have.

Also, they can revoke your Concealed Carry permit (if you have one) for 3 years. Having been incarcerated for a weapons violation, you can kiss goodbye any chances that the local sheriff will look kindly on you re-application after the 3 years are up.

One of the most shameful of penalties is that you are reduced to an object; They can and will require that you be examined by a 'mental health professional', perhaps also by a 'chemical dependency specialist'. This is not a legalistic process, where you are reliably protected by your own lawyer. This is a 'medical procedure' (comparable to a hysterectomy) during which the 'professionals' and the 'specialists' can operate on you as they will, with no legal recourse and no defense against their predations. They're doing whatever they choose with your mind and your body, because it is 'for your own good'.

The Gods Must Be Crazy. And So Must You.

Sounds a lot like a Soviet Gulag, or more appropriately like the Soviet practice of incarcerating political prisoners in a mental institution, under the principle that if you protest against the state you must be crazy.

Adding insult to injury, the bill also encourages the posting of "Gun Free Zone" signs all over the place.
__________________________

SB6860 (click here for full text) was first read on January 29, 2008; it is also scheduled for a public hearing on February 7,2008. In a surprising contrast, this bill "[Prohibits] institutions of higher education from adopting rules concerning the possession of firearms".

Presented by Senators Roach, Delvin, Stevens, This bill is much more elegant. The basic premise is that "... The state of Washington hereby fully occupies and preempts the
8 entire field of firearms regulation within the boundaries of the state." It further states that "... Cities, towns, and counties or 13 other municipalities may enact only those laws and ordinances relating to firearms that are specifically authorized by state law ..." and "... Local laws and ordinances that are inconsistent with, more restrictive than, or exceed the requirements of state law shall not be enacted ..."

There are a few more word in the bill than are quoted here, but that's the gist of it.

The first bill says "the individual has no rights, and we will stomp you into the dirt if you insist upon them". The second bill says "the suits have no right".

I know which one I would support.

Live, work or go to school in Washington? Write your congress critter. And show up for the Public Hearings on February 7. Take a day off work, or school. There's nothing you can do on campus that day which is more important, more rewarding, or more meaningful in the evolution of a Free Citizen than to be there.

(Read the original article, link at the top, for place and time.)

And thank you, David, for bringing this to our attention.

2008 Geek Guide to "State Encoded Ammunition" Bills

Given the plethora of "Encoded Ammunition" bills introduced into various State legislatures in January, 2008 (five so far; there may be more, I'm still researching), it occurred to me that it would be handy to have some kind of 'tracking document'.

Accordingly, I spent a couple of hours building an Excel Spreadsheet listing the salient characteristics of all the bills I have so far discovered. You can download the "2008 Geek Guide ..."( etc.) here.

Note that the file, 2008_Encoded_Ammunition.xls, will require that you have Microsoft EXCEL loaded on your computer. You can download it, but you can't read it without the software.

Here's a list of the states reported to date: Illinois, Indiana, Mississippi, Hawaii, Tennessee.

And here is a list of the data items found there, along with a short (?) description of the data points:

• State: The name of the state in which the bill is introduced.
  
• Bill #: The designation of the bill(s). Note that in at least one state (Tennessee), the identical bill was simultaneously introduced in both houses.
  
• Link to Text: A "Tiny URL" code. Copy and past it into your web browser, and the original URL will be generated to take you to the document which contains the full text of the bill. Note that I neglected to include this link in at least one of my original articles. I hope I've corrected those articles, but ALL are referenced here.
  
• Sponsor: The name of the state legislature(s) who sponsored and/or introduced the bill. This allows you, if you are a resident of that state, to follow him/her back to his/her personal website and send him/her emails appropriate to the amount of outrage you feel about his/her disenfranchisement of honest shooters.
  
• Justification for bill?: A simple YES/NO, if the text of the bill includes verbiage which attempts to justify the introduction of this disgusting piece of .... legislation. (Sorry, I can't help editorializing, even when I know I shouldn't. I'm just that irritated.)
  
• Date Bill Introduced: The date the bill was first read into the record in the state house, assembly or senate.
  
• Bill Status: The current status of the bill, usually, "referred to Committee" or similar verbiage. Bills so designated sometimes STAY in committee until the end of the legislative session (January 1 of the following year), after which they will die. At least one bill has a "bill expiration date" built into it, which I presume refers to the legislative guidelines for that state.
  
• Type of Ammo: The limitations on the kind of ammunition which is subject to these restrictions. ALWAYS "Handgun", but may also include "Assault Weapon" or "Assault Pistol". Some states include a list of "Designated Weapons" in the bill, which usually refer to what is essentially an "Assault Weapons" list established by existing state laws.
  
• Sell Only By Date: The date upon which vendors (retailers, etc.) may offer for sale 'only' ammunition ... or bullets (some states mention both) which has been "encoded".
  
• Own Only By Date: The date upon which all vendors and private citizens may not possess ammunition (or bullets? .. not always clear) which has not been "encoded". Possession may or may not involve specific penalties; see below.
  
• Per-Round Tax/Fee?: ALL states have, as far as I know and of this date, imposed some kind of tax or fee per bullet; this is most commonly five cents, although one state sets the fee at ".005 cents" which works out at five cents per thousand rounds or bullets. As noted, this last may be a typographical error. It's difficult to imagine politicians setting the fee so low, as long as the bill is obviously designed as an ipso facto impediment to free exercise of the second amendment. (There I go again!) Mississippi politicians aren't even honest enough to set the fee as part of the bill. They merely stipulate that a "End User Fee" will be established. Don't expect a "five cents per thousand rounds" fee from these boys. They ALL have to finance a database system, enforcement, and undefined other expenses needed to administer this bogus bill. (Oops! Sorry.)
  
• Fee Retained by Retailer: A couple of states provide that the vendor may retain a portion of the fees they collect, presumably to encourage the vendors to support the bill. Fat chance, ammunition sales will be so undercut by this oinker that the resulting market won't support any retail sales of ammunition or other firearms-related business in these states. (Dammit! Stop that, Geek!)
  
• Owner Penalties: This identifies the fines or penalties which may be imposed on 'anyone' who attempts to defile, obscure or obliterate the serial numbers on a bullet or round of ammunition. Usually a misdemeanor ... but we're usually talking about a year in the pokey and/or a fine of $1,000.
  
• Merchant Tax Penalty: One state (Illinois) imposes a penalty on a vendor who fails to accurately report tax revenues (the "per-round tax/fee"). This is a Class 4 Felony in Illinois. As may be presumed, the bureaucrats don't like it if you file the serial numbers off bullets but they take it seriously when you don't pay them their Dane Geld, hence the Felony vs the Misdemeanor. (That was okay, wasn't it? Not 'editorializing'?) The rest don't mention it ... to date. Apparently, that is covered in another section of the Code.
  
• Merchants Adherence Fine: I THINK this is the fine for selling non-encoded ammunition after the cutoff date. Your guess is as good as mine. Universally, it's $1,000.
  
• Buyer Data Collected: The information that the vendor is required to collect to define the retail buyer. Always Name, Date of Birth, Driver's License Number, and "any other information which the (governing agency) may define/require". More weasel words; they can ask for the serial number of the firearm in which you choose to shoot the ammunition, if they want to, and if there are not state laws forbidding this ... it's okay!
  
• Retailer Reporting: The vendor must report the information recorded on each ammunition sale periodically. This is either Monthly or Quarterly, if it is included in the Bill. Presumably, when you report the information, you must also remit the 'End User Fee' collected at the time of sale.
  
• Enforcement: For the Average Joe, this is one of the most important facets of the bills. In Illinois, the 'administrative authority' (usually the DOJ) can make it up as they go. Excuse, I mean the "any reasonable rules" may be imposed. That's an administrative decision, not subject to normal Congressional Oversight. Not encouraging. In Tennessee, the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation (TBI) is the administrative authority. Isn't it nice when the police get to make the rules?
  
• Exceptions: Who do these bills, if they become laws, NOT apply to? In those states in which the legislators actually spent more than ten minutes writing the bill, the "Federal, State and Local Law Enforcement Organizations" are exempt. No word yet on whether the National Guard and the U.S. Military are exempt; but since they are not LEOs, and they are not specifically exempt ... hey, they might grab a few bucks from the Feds! (Must ... Control ... The ... Fist ... Of ... Death!)
  
• Bill Expiration Date: As mentioned above, one state included and expiration date for the bill if it is not enacted into law. Probably an administrative requirement, but I include it just for ... well, actually, no reason at all.
  
• Notes: Miscellaneous notes included only to show that not all states just stuck to boilerplate. The general text is obviously taken from a template ... source not yet identified ... but some states legislatures seemed to feel that they needed to assert their individuality. Indiana declared an emergency; Hawaii and Mississippi granted an 'income tax credit' for in-state bullet/ammunition manufacturers to purchase, install and use bullet-encoding machinery; Tennessee included a really onerous records-keeping requirement for both vendors and manufacturers.
  
• Text for Justification of Bill, if present: For states which included a justification of this bill (a minority, only Hawaii and Tennessee), the full text of their 'justification' is included just so you don't have to read the actual bills. I found it interesting that (so far) the majority of states which accepted this bill-template didn't feel it necessary to explain WHY this bill was necessary. I interpret this to mean that they don't care enough about the citizens who have to live under these egregious rules; they just entered the bill because they can. I'm guessing that they're Liberal Democrats who are just looking for a real good rating from The Brady Campaign, and don't expect the bills to get out of committee, let alone actually pass, so why bother? This may be "a good sign" that the authors aren't serious about the bill(s).
  

I'll be updating this document, if and as more states are found to have proposed similar bills. (What am I saying? These are all the same bill, with minor variations.) If you find an error in the document .. and I do strongly encourage you to view this document critically with the goal of correcting errors and providing more information ... please let me know.

I'm tempted to dismiss these bills as bogus, not likely to pass; nothing to see here folks, move along. But since the Microstamping Bill (not the same thing) was passed in California last year, it is demonstrably NOT SAFE to expect that any gun-control bill, no matter how unreasonable or how irresponsibly enacted or how badly worded, cannot be passed by any given legislature. EVERY TIME a bogus gun-control bill is passed by a state, it sets a precedent for other states which are controlled by liberal gun-grabber politicians who just want to get their names on the roster of 'people who are trying to accomplish something about crime!'

No more editorializing. Every time I write one of these articles, it makes my guts ache for the rest of the night. I find it hard to believe that these weasels are stomping on the rights of their constituents for their own career advancement.

But then, if they weren't rats and weasels, they would find honest work.

Encoded Ammunition: Tennessee

NRA-ILA :: Legislation

FINALLY we see the NRA reacting to the plethora of "Encoded Ammunition" bills being presented to state legislatures across the land.

But do they recognize that this is NOT just an isolated incident?

No, the NRA does not.

Instead, they present their usual Alerts with just a single notification in the case of Tennessee, without mentioning that similar bills have been presented in Maryland, Illinois, Indiana, Mississippi, Maryland and Hawaii.

That's SEVEN out of FIFTY states which have presented bills with essentially the same text.

(The Tennessee text is available here for your comparison.)

The National Rifle Association, which has for the past 20 years presented itself as the nation's premier resource for defending your 2nd amendment rights, has completely missed the larger issue: that the same bill (which would perform an 'end run' around the 2nd amendment) has been proposed in SIX states (Maryland, Illinois, Indiana, Mississippi, Hawaii, and now Tennessee) within a 30-day period.

Rather than being recognized as a trend; rather that noting that this represents a concerted and highly organized attack on the 2nd Amendment; the NRA has decided to report this as an isolated incident.

Is it possible that the NRA is unaware that similar bills have been presented in (at least) five other states?

(Note: Other states may be, and probably are, subject to the same or similar bills. I'm just one man, it's impossible for me to track the bills introduced to ALL state legislatures. Is the NRA capable of identifying only ONE attack on the 2nd Amendment, while I, a lone and independent blogger have so far identified SIX similar assaults? We who are members of the NRA ... however reluctantly ... are capable of independent internet searches. Hey, NRA! For Minimum Wages, I will be happy to find and identify states which have presented similar bills, which you with your multi-million dollar annual budget seem unable to find or address.)

WTF is WRONG with the NRA, your First Line of Defense?

My guess: if it doesn't directly support an established Fund-Raising Activity, they really don't give a shit.
_______________________________________-
Back to the issue at hand: the Tennessee bill on "Encoded Ammunition:"

Referring to the links supplied by the NRA:

Tennessee Bill SB3395:

• Is essentially the same (see the text) as the Mississippi bill referenced in a previous post, with minor differences in detail:
• The bill is known as the "Ammunition Accountability Act";
• There is a minimal attempt to justify the bill in terms of ".. quickly [identifying] persons of interest in gun crime investigations" ... which is a refreshing change from the majority of bills of this type, which typically don't even make this cursory effort to justify the unreasonable and unsupportable reason for presenting such legislation;
  
• The deadline for Encoded Ammunition being presented for sale is ONE YEAR (January 1, 2009);
• The deadline for "non-coded" (as opposed to "noncoded" [sic] as proposed in the Mississippi bill) is January 1, 2010;
• The data to be recorded is similar to the Mississippi bill ... almost word-for-word;
• Rather than penalties for non-compliance for "manufacturers" to be $1000 for the first offense, $5000 for the second offense, and %10,000 for the third offense, the penalties for non-compliance for "manufacturers" will be $1000 for the first offense and $5000 for the second and subsequent offenses.
• ____________________________

(Here's the House Bill ...unique to this state: Tennessee, in that it is presented to both the Senate and the House. A cursory comparison reveals NO differences between the Senate and the House versions of the Bill. (Curious, no? Unless both houses received the same bill from the same external source.)

What is the NRA doing about this?

Nothing.

According to their last emailed member notification, this is the extent of their concerns:

___________________________________________________

ILLINOIS: Gun Rights Under Assault in Cook County! As we reported previously, Cook County is currently considering two anti-gun proposals that must be defeated! First, the Safe Streets/Weapons Registration Ordinance requires the registration of all firearms and firearm owners in the county. As written, it is an outright gun ban and prohibits the transport of a firearm in your vehicle unless the firearm is "broken down in a nonfunctioning state." The other proposed ordinance would amend the county's "Deadly Weapon Dealers Ordinance" to completely ban all gun shows within the county, and prohibits federally licensed dealers from operating within 10 miles of one another. Please contact the Cook County Board of Commissioners today and respectfully urge them to oppose these ordinances. Contact information for the Board can be found by clicking here.

{skip}

MARYLAND: De Facto Gun Registration Scheme Proposed! On Tuesday, February 26, the House Judiciary Committee and the House Ways & Means Committee have scheduled a hearing to consider House Bill 517. HB517 would require ammunition manufacturers to encode a serial number on all ammunition for regulated firearms (handguns and "assault weapons") sold in the state. Shotgun ammunition is exempted. The bill would also create an intrusive database of ammunition purchasers, including the name, date of birth, driver's license number, serial number of ammunition purchased, and "any other information the Secretary (of State Police) considers necessary" would be compiled. Please contact the members of the House Judiciary Committee and the House Ways & Means Committee and respectfully urge them to oppose this onerous attack on our privacy and Second Amendment rights. Contact information can be found by clicking here.

MISSISSIPPI: Two Bills Introduced to Protect Ranges! Earlier this week, two bills were proposed in the Mississippi Legislature that would expand the scope of protection for shooting ranges and gun club facilities within the state. Senate Bill 2466 and House Bill 346 would prohibit local governments from placing restrictions on existing shooting ranges by prohibiting any new laws or ordinances from being enacted. Please contact your State Legislators and respectfully urge them to support both SB 2466 and HB 346 once they are assigned hearing dates within their referred committees. Contact information can be found here.

{skip}

TENNESSEE: Ammo Serialization Bill Filed in House and Senate! On Thursday, January 17, legislation was filed in both the Tennessee House and Senate that would requires all handgun ammunition manufactured or sold in Tennessee to be coded with a serial number, and entered into a statewide database at the time of sale. Encoded ammunition would be registered to the purchaser and would include the date of transaction, the purchaser's name, date of birth, driver's license number, and the serial number of the ammunition. SB3395, sponsored by State Senator Reginald Tate (District 33) and HB3245, sponsored by State Representative Larry Miller (District 88) pose a serious threat to our Right to Keep and Bear Arms and need to be stopped immediately. Please contact your State Legislators and respectfully urge them to protect the Second Amendment rights of Tennessee's law-abiding gun owners by opposing SB3395 and HB3245. Please visit http://www.legislature.state.tn.us/senate/members/smembers.htm#Find for contact information for your State Senator, and http://www.legislature.state.tn.us/house/members/hmembers.htm#Find for contact information for your State Representative.

___________________________________________________

That's right. Similar bills have been introduced in (to my personal knowledge) Maryland, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Mississippi and Tennessee within the past 30 days, and the text of the bills have been essentially identical. Yet although the NRA has specifically addressed "New Legislation in half of these states in their recent Alerts, only in Tennessee have they noticed that the "Encoded Ammunition" bills have been introduced in January, 2008. They seem not to have noticed that this is a recurring theme, nor have the noticed that it is evidence (six states out of 50, in one month, with boiler-plate text modified only by 'local' concerns) text.

Again, I do NOT have the resources to track legislation in all 50 states, but I have incidentally identified bills in six of 50 states, without even trying.

What has the NRA done for you here?

Please discontinue your NRA membership, and sign on to my personal "I Will Tell You What Crap The Anti-gunners Are Visiting Upon You" website. Send me whatever the NRA has charged you for annual membership.

I will do a better job of identifying 2nd Amendment threats than the NRA. I will tell you first, I will give you the details, and I will not confuse you with secondary issues such as "Let's Force Your Boss to Let You Carry A Gun In Your Car In The Company Parking Lot" issues.

Oh, by the way: I won't mount a national campaign to proselytize issues which you don't care about. But I WILL do a much better job of keeping you informed about bullshit national campaigns by the anti-gun forces to undermine your 2nd Amendment rights.

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!