All posts by Carl Bussjaeger

Firearms Policy & Law Analyst at The Zelman Partisans Personal Blog: https://www.bussjaeger.us/blog/
authoritarian swine, Constitution, Courts, gun control, Law, Rights

Texas To Raise Firearm Purchase Age?

1 Comment

That’s what state Senator Roland Gutierrez wants to do.

Texas State Sen. Gutierrez announces ‘common sense gun safety’ bills</a
In a news release sent out Tuesday morning, Gutierrez’s office said the bills will address purchasing age requirements, a bulk ammunition database and the safekeeping of firearms.
[…]
Gutierrez started the conference by stating that he is not looking to take guns away; rather he wants the state to raise the age requirement of those who can purchase firearms from 18 to 21.

Given the BRUEN test of general historical tradition, that is likely to backfire on him. The general (federal) tradition at the time was The Militia Act of 1792, which specified:

“That each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as is herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia”
[…]
“That every citizen, so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock“

18 year-olds must be armed. So raising the age won’t fly. And federal courts are beginning to agree.

The “backfire” part lies in the current law, 10 U.S. Code § 246 – Militia: composition and classes: “able-bodied males at least 17 years of age“.

Seventeen year-old males are in the militia.

Should Gutierrez’s proposal pass and be signed into law, court challenges — under BRUEN precedent — are very likely to force lowering the minimum age to purchase a firearm.

I think his other bills — safe storage, ammunition background checks and registration, liability insurance, etc — should also be reexamined in light of BRUEN. I think you’ll find Associate Justice Thomas’s words on surety interesting, when considering the liability insurance proposal:

…the surety statutes presumed that individuals had a right to public carry that could be burdened only if another could make out a specific showing of “reasonable cause to fear an injury, or breach of the peace.

The closest thing to firearm liability insurance only began happening in the mid-19th century, and then only for those against whom a credible and specific showing of a threat had been made (take note of that for “red flag” laws, too).

In case you wondered, Gutierrez is a Dimwit-ocrat; adf the Dims are being very slow to catch on to the nuances of BRUEN, and the new original playing field.

 

Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses.
Gab Pay link
(More Tip Jar Options)
Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
Courts, gun control, Humor, Law, You can't fix stupid

Possibly The Marines Need to Work On Their Marksmanship

2 Comments

Because, after reading this “expert report” by retired Marine Colonel Craig Tucker, I’m wondering how many of those “9 assassination attempts” were failed, not-so-friendly-fire fragging attempts.

Tucker’s report is a court filing in support of California’s assault weapon ban et al. Go ahead and read it. It’ll infuriate and amuse you:

Stabilizing devices (for more accurate shooting) are bad. (Pistol grips.)

Destabilizing devices are bad, because shooting is less accurate. (That refers to unlocked(!?) folding stocks on M4s. Do the Marines issue M4s with folding — not adjustable — stocks?)

Flash hiders hide the flash from the enemy.

Swapping magazines is the most important thing Marines are taught. (See title re:marksmanship)

The M16/M4 is specifically rifled to make bullets tumble.

“A single round [of .223!] is capable of severing the upper body from the lower body”

The semi-auto AR-15 is functionally identical to the full-auto M4.

And apparently the Marines are now buying M4s specifically chambered for .223 Remington, not 5.56 NATO.

This guy must have been a joy to serve under, and I’d like to hear from anyone who had that… privilege. Well, I guess there was a Captain who served under him and presumably enjoyed it, even if it got Tucker relieved of command (and apparently driven into retirement).

There’s another court filing in rebuttal to Tucker’s not-very-expert opinion. J. Buford Boone all but says outright that Tucker is full of s**t. He might as well.

His claim that a single small arms projectile is capable of “severing the upper body from the lower body, or decapitation” is so ridiculous that it should, and actually does, cast doubt on his qualifications as an expert in the field of firearms, particularly as it relates to wound ballistics.

California must be pretty darned desperate if the’re having to bring in Tucker as an expert.

Hat tip to Wisco Dave and Kenny.

Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses.
Gab Pay link
(More Tip Jar Options)
Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
guns, shooting

MRI and Guns Do Not Mix

1 Comment

I’d only heard of this happening once before, several years ago. But it seems it’s happened since. And now again.

Lawyer dies three weeks after MRI machine’s magnetic field triggers his hidden gun to go off while taking his mother for a routine medical visit at a Brazilian lab
Mathias, a married father-of-one, was accompanying his mother to an appointment at Laboratorio Cura and forgot to remove his 9mm weapon from his waistband after entering the imaging room, according to Brazilian news outlet G1.

Police said that the MRI machine’s magnetic field pulled the concealed gun away from his waist.

The gun hit the machine and the impact caused it to discharge one bullet that struck him in the abdomen.

Yes, he was told to leave his possession behind before entering the room, and specifically metal objects.

He “forgot.”

Yes, the magnetic field from a magnetic resonance imager is strong enough to grab objects a few feet away.

 

Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses.
Gab Pay link
(More Tip Jar Options)
Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
authoritarian swine, Constitution, gun control, gun grabbers, Law

How Many Doors?

1 Comment

““The sheer immorality of victim disarmament aside, one would hope every law enforcement officer out there would stop to consider all the possible ramifications of kicking in several million doors because the occupants are well armed.”
— Carl Bussjaeger

I seem to be re-using that quote a lot lately; here we go again. A few days ago, I wrote about a New Mexico bill to ban “assault pistols” (and other things). That bill would ban future transfers, but leave currently possessed items alone. Clearly state Rep. Andrea Romero and her co-conspirators couldn’t settle for that. (There are actually several bills, but I’ll focus on one.)

Thus, she has filed HB 101 – RELATING TO FIREARMS; PROHIBITING LARGE-CAPACITY MAGAZINES; PROHIBITING ASSAULT WEAPONS; PROVIDING PENALTIES.

This would be an outright ban (for civilians) of “large-capacity” magazines and “assault weapons;” no grandfathering whatsoever.

A person shall not possess, manufacture, purchase, sell or transfer any large-capacity ammunition feeding device regardless of whether the device is attached to a firearm. This section shall not apply to magazines originally designed to accept more than ten rounds of ammunition that have been modified to accept no more than ten rounds and that are not capable of being readily restored to a capacity of more than ten rounds.

B. For the purposes of this section, “large-capacity ammunition feeding device” means a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip or similar device that has a capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than ten rounds of ammunition.

A person shall not manufacture, import, possess, purchase, sell or transfer any assault weapon.

So, Ms. Romero: How many doors? How many doors are you willing to kick in solely because the residents are well armed? Have you asked that question of the street level cops who would be enforcing your diktat, or are you going to lead the stacks personally, as an inspiration for them?

Have you even heard of NYSRP v. Bruen?

And I see that while you would ban possession of these… evil weapons of mass destruction designed to kill as many people as possible, as many of your political persuasion describe them, you’re just fine with government agents (your door-kicking cops/enforcers) having them and obtaining more. Why is that?

C. Subsection B of this section shall not apply to:

(1) any government officer, agent or employee, a member of the armed forces of the United States or a peace officer to the extent that such person is otherwise authorized to acquire or possess an assault weapon and does so while acting within the scope of that person’s duties;

Why do your favored cops need the capability to kill as many of us as possible?

Why do you want them to be able to kill us?

These are not rhetorical questions, and I have asked them of Romero directly. She has not responded.

 

Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses.
Gab Pay link
(More Tip Jar Options)
Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
"News Media", authoritarian swine, gun control, Law

Dallas Morning News Does Humor

Not intentionally, mind you; but still.

The editorial board of the Dallas Morning News published an opinion piece on why those nasty pistol braces need to be banned. Their… reasoning stops short of informed rationality. For instance:

There’s no difference between the business end of a rifle and a handgun of the same caliber.

Perhaps they’d consider changing that to “cartridge” instead of “caliber.” Otherwise — and ignoring the effect of barrel length on ballistics — they’re saying that a little .22LR revolver is the same as a AR-pattern rifle chambered for 5.56 NATO. They’re both .22 caliber, after all.

But this one…

But shorter barrels make guns less accurate and easier to conceal. They also make them easier to maneuver in crowded places, which may be why shooters in at least two mass murders — at a grocery store in Boulder in 2021, and a busy street in Dayton in 2019 — used handgun braces.

This first part is a gross over-simplification. Assuming either pistol or rifle has enough barrel length for the bullet to spin stabilize, and not so much length as to sap energy through friction, inherent accuracy isn’t that different. If one is using iron sights, the difference in sight radius can make longer barrel eaiser to fire accurately; but that’s an issue with the shooter, not the firearm.

The second part, regarding concealability and maneuverability is hilarious.

Take a pistol, say an AR-pattern pistol with a ten inch barrel. Now add a stabilizing brace to it — making it longer — and now it’s more concealable?

Since the board is concerned with accuracy, you might even think they’s approve of a braced pistol, said brace making it easier for the shooter to fire accurately.

But do you know what is even more concealable, and “maneuverable in crowded spaces,” than a short-barrel rifle or a braced pistol? Basically any conventional unbraced handgun in the world. Could that be why those are used in the vast majority of shootings, mass or otherwise?

 

Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses.
Gab Pay link
(More Tip Jar Options)
Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
gun control, gun grabbers, Law

Giggling In Georgia

1 Comment

Georgia state Rep. Sandra Scott reportedly wants to ban Glock automatic weapon conversion devices.

State Rep. Sandra Scott, Dim-Rex, previously told The Center Square she plans to file several pieces of legislation, including a measure to prevent Glock owners from turning the guns into automatic weapons.

As of this writing, I do not see a Scott bill to ban the manufacture of automatic weapons. I have emailed Scott to see if she can provide advance text, or at least a bill number when filed.

Because — as the clued-in probably guessed — it sounds a bit redundant. After all, the National Firearms Act of 1934, as mended by the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986, already makes the manufacture of machine guns, by anyone other than an FFL who has paid the SOT, unlawful. And those machine guns aren’t generally transferable to us common, little people.

Georgia law, specifically § 16-11-122, makes possession of machine guns illegal. There are lawful exceptions in § 16-11-124; most notably if the firearm is properly registered under the aforementioned NFA.

True, Georgia law doesn’t seem to specifically ban the manufacture, but once to add the conversion device to the handgun, you’re in possession (see above paragraph).

For that matter, a conversion device is itself a “machinegun” as defined in 26 U.S. Code § 5845.

The term shall also include the frame or receiver of any such weapon, any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun

Possession of the device is possession of a machinegun under federal and state law. Just ask the folks the ATF has charged with felony possession of unregistered machinguns for giggle switches, lightning links, flat pieces of metal, and wall-hooks.

I strongly suspect that urban gangbangers putting giggle switches on their Glocks are not FFL/SOTs, nor did they register their giggle switches by the 1986 deadline for lawful possession (I don’t know how many Glocks were even in US non-government hands in ’86).

 

Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses.
Gab Pay link
(More Tip Jar Options)
Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
Courts, guns, Law

Baldwin Charging Affidavit

2 Comments

The probable cause statement for Alec Baldwin’s involuntary manslaughter charges is available.

For those with an unfortunate interest in law, it’s very interesting. For those convinced that Baldwin shouldn’t have been charged because he’s just a stupid actor, and you can’t expect actors to show any sense, and the Four Rules aren’t law…

…it will be infuriating.

In Baldwin’s case: They have video and photos of him fingering the trigger. He skipped safety training. When the armorer roped him into training, he spent the whole time on the phone.

A forensic report that says the handgun was functioning correctly. The trigger had to be pulled.

Baldwin changing his story.

The document describes film industry standards and protocols, and describes how Baldwin — as the primary producer — actively and willfully blew them off.

The Four Rules? I had said

Aesop might as well claim that Baldwin shouldn’t be charged because § 30-2-3 doesn’t specifically say not to point a load gun at people and pull the trigger when you don’t even know if it’s loaded. Those words aren’t there either.

“Without due caution and circumspection” are, and the Rules illustrate what due caution and circumspection look like.

The probable cause statement — using different phrasing — says precisely that. Because…

One more time; if I were the prosecutor, I’d present clips from interviews, and social media post of Baldwin telling everyone else how to do it right, and ask him, “Mr. Baldwin, for years you’ve claimed you know better on firearm safety than everyone else. Why are you now claiming to be dumber than a six year-old in need of constant adult supervision?”

And that’s exactly what the prosecution has done in the probable cause statement: You know this stuff. Why didn’t you do it?

Negligence is when you know better, but do it anyway. This document establishes that Baldwin did it, should have known better, and has repeatedly claimed to know better.

On the armorer front, Gutierrez-Reed will need to do some serious explaining. Per the statement, law enforcement found — this is addition to the expended round used to kill Hutchins — six live rounds on set. Including a live round on Baldwin’s holster.

And forensics indicates those live rounds did not come from the movie’s supplier as she had once tried to imply.

So, little miss armorer, why were live rounds on set at all, and where did they come from? Why did you never notice live rounds mixed in with your equipment?

I recall early claims that she had been letting people use prop guns for recreational plinking. I think those claims just became a lot more credible.

 

Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses.
Gab Pay link
(More Tip Jar Options)
Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
Action, authoritarian swine, Courts, gun control, Law

Pistol Brace Rule

1 Comment

It’s probably worth noting that the ATF’s pistol brace rule was formally published in the Federal Register today, making it official.

The countdown has started. If you have a braced pistol, you have 120 days to decide how to proceed.

You may have heard that those attempting to register braced firearms as short-barrel rifles, may have an issue. Some claimed that if the form isn’t processed in 88 days, then it’s automatically denied. A more cogent explanation clarifies that.

When you apply for your tax stamp, the ATF goes to the FBI’s NICS for a background check. Unlike a firearm sale, which can proceed if the NICS check doesn’t come back in three days, at 88 days without a NICS response, the application is denied. It’s then up to you to go to the FBI and ask “What the heck’s going on with my background check?” and resubmit your stamp application.

Meanwhile, the Firearms Policy Coalition has already filed its lawsuit challenging the rule. I’m not sure if they were the first, because it looks like it was a dead heat with the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty’s lawsuit.

Good luck, folks.

 

Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses.
Gab Pay link
(More Tip Jar Options)
Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
authoritarian swine, gun control, Law

New Mexican “Assault Pistol”

8 Comments

New Mexico state Senator William P. Soules [Dim] has filed a new bill, SB 171 RELATING TO FIREARMS; PROHIBITING THE SALE OF AUTOMATIC FIREARMS.

It begins by defining a new class of evil firearms; the assault pistol.

“assault pistol” means a semiautomatic pistol that accepts a detachable magazine and has two or more of the following characteristics:

(a) an ammunition magazine that attaches to the pistol outside the pistol grip;

(b) a threaded barrel capable of accepting a barrel extender, flash suppressor, forward hand grip or silencer;

(c) a shroud that is attached to or partially or completely encircles the barrel and permits the shooter to hold the firearm with the second hand without being burned;

(d) a manufactured weight of fifty ounces or more when the pistol is unloaded;

(e) a centerfire pistol with an overall length of twelve inches or more; or

(f) a semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm;

Fairly standard Dimwit definition of “assault weapon,” except that it only applies to handguns, not long guns. An oversight? Is Soules just focused on the California “assault pistol” allegedly used in the recent Chinese new year shooting, due to the notoriously short Dim attention span?

It’s a wonder he didn’t include cowboy six-shooters.

But now things get interesting. After defining “automatic firearm” and “semiautomatic,” he adds this language.

B. The manufacture, sale, barter, trade, gift, transfer or acquisition of any of the following is prohibited: assault pistols; automatic firearms; rifles with barrel lengths less than sixteen inches; shotguns with barrel lengths less than eighteen inches; mufflers, silencers or devices for deadening or muffling the sound of discharged firearms; any type of ammunition or any projectile component thereof coated with teflon or any other similar coating designed primarily to enhance its capabilities to penetrate metal or pierce protective armor; and any type of ammunition or any projectile component thereof designed or intended to explode or segment upon impact with its target.

That looks to me like someone is very worried about the federal National Firearms Act being overturned, and wants to ensure they still have a state law on the books when it happens.

“Manufacture, sale, barter, trade, gift, transfer or acquisition.” Nothing about possession of anything you currently have. nothing about registration. That’s something; but I expect Soules merely left that out knowing that an outright ban won’t fly. If he can get this bill passed, I’m sure he’ll address that little matter later.

 

Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses.
Gab Pay link
(More Tip Jar Options)
Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
authoritarian swine, gun control, gun grabbers, Law

Here We Go Again

2 Comments

Dementia victim Dianne Feinstein has filed her annual “assault weapon” ban; the Assault Weapons Ban of 2023.

It’s the usual mess, defining “assault weapons” as semi-autos that use detachable magazines and have one of the same ol’ same ol other characteristics: pistol grip, adjustable or detachable stock, grenade launcher, barrel shroud, threaded barrel.

Presumably grenade launchers on pump action shotguns are still cool.

It also includes:

A semiautomatic rifle that has a fixed ammunition feeding device with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds, except for an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.

Weirdly, despite that “semiautomatic, detachable magazine” definition, the idiot saw fit to include page after page of exempted weapons: lever actions, side by side and over and under shotguns, bolt actions, and assorted semi-autos with fixed magazines.

She’s never been noted for her cognitive acuity, even before her brain turned to jello.

As usual, Feinstein’s “ban” doesn’t actually ban any firearm. All those millions of existing AR- and AK-pattern firearms are grandfathered. Apparently at least one of the senile senator’s keepers still recalls this warning.

“The sheer immorality of victim disarmament aside, one would hope every law enforcement officer out there would stop to consider all the possible ramifications of kicking in several million doors because the occupants are well armed.”

 

Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses.
Gab Pay link
(More Tip Jar Options)
Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail