Alphecca

Weekly Check on the Bias

Welcome to my Weekly Report on media gun bias. Talk about a "slow news day..."! Still, one never knows what I'll find as I Google the net. Take, for instance, this nifty Rubberband Machine Gun from Backyard Artillery:

Here's a description of it from their website:

This beauty is a fully funcitonal machine gun with TWELVE rotating barrels and a live action trigger. Loads 12 bands per barrel for a whopping 144 rubber bands that shoot off as fast as you can turn the handle! Great fun for kids of all ages. MORE than just an amazing machine, this is a true work of art.

Hand crafted in the USA, The rubber band machine gun uses a similar mechanism to the famous Gatling Gun of the old west. It stands 40 inches tall and 44 inches from the handle to the tip of the barrels. The turret effortlessly spins a full 360 degrees and tilts from 45 degrees up to 22 degrees down so you can easily keep a moving target in your sights, no matter where it goes.

We keep one loaded in the office at all times to defend against hostile takeover attempts and pushy vendors.

I agree, it is a work of art and it reminds me of a grandfather clock I once saw that was made entirely of wood: The gears, pins, springs, everything.

Anyway, this allows a clever segue to this Arizona Republic story:

CHANDLER - People who carry toy guns that look real won't be breaking the law here anymore.
The City Council rewrote a municipal weapons ordinance that used to make it a misdemeanor to carry a loaded air gun, BB gun or paint-ball gun in a public place even though it is legal to carry real guns under state law.

The council made it legal to carry the less-lethal weapons but not fire them or display them in a threatening manner on public property. It's still legal to use them on private property.

The law came under fire from parents who said the toys aren't dangerous and the restrictions were too harsh.

But school and police officials said they are concerned about the real-gun appearance of toys and the potential for injury from plastic projectiles.

We all know that some locales have been trying to ban toy guns (or replica guns) because there have been instances of them being mistaken for real guns. Most replicas come with a bright orange muzzle plug, I believe. Paint guns couldn't be mistaken for anything but what they are, and BB guns are a part of growing-up.

None-the-less, if it is legal to carry real guns in Arizona then common sense says that toy ones should be allowed as well.

That neatly segues to a GayWired.com report about the story out of Utah of armed gays not being welcome to attend gay pride events. I've already covered it extensively but since many of you only check-in here for this Weekly Report:

(Salt Lake City, UT) - A week after the leader of a gay firearms group challenged a controversial policy from organizers of the state's annual gay- and lesbian-pride events which would have banned legally concealed firearms from most of the events, GLBT Community Center of Utah Inc. Executive Director Valerie Larabee, who is also a lifelong shooter, said on May 27 that organizers will instead welcome people who choose to take their legal firearms and instead prohibit only those who violate laws.

Stonewall Shooting Sports of Utah founder and owner David Nelson said that the change is an encouraging reiteration of the 2003 and 2004 pride-events rules when organizers agreed that people with legally concealed firearms could not be denied admission to the events. Nelson's challenge of the policy which led to the change won the attention of state and national news media.

"Despite an unnecessarily bad start to the upcoming events, the organizers understand now that people with Utah Concealed Firearm Permits aren't the disruptive or illegal parts of their events," Nelson said. "No one who has met every legal requirement including daily FBI criminal-history investigations should be arbitrarily denied the legal, responsible and safe exercise of our human right to defend ourselves if we choose and need to do so."

As pro-2A blogger Zendo Deb points out (and the news story didn't), Utah laws on concealed-carry would make it illegal to exclude legally permitted gun toters from attending public events held on government property. So again, we have common sense (with legal backing) taking hold, this time with real guns instead of toy ones.

That story would dovetail nicely with the one from Merry Old England, where there is no common sense. Having disarmed their law-abiding citizens of any remaining right to fending--off the mutants preying on them at increasing rates, now, some misguided medical professionals are calling for kitchen knife control:

A team from West Middlesex University Hospital said violent crime is on the increase - and kitchen knives are used in as many as half of all stabbings.

They argued many assaults are committed impulsively, prompted by alcohol and drugs, and a kitchen knife often makes an all too available weapon.

The research is published in the British Medical Journal.

The researchers said there was no reason for long pointed knives to be publicly available at all.

I first mentioned this story last week and it's really so silly that all I can do is reprint my sarcasm:

This is sure to upset the many great chefs of England, a country deservedly renowned for it's world-class cuisine (think Haute Britannia) and second only -- perhaps -- to the fabulous fare served-up by African bushmen.

Returning to the US, there were more disturbing developments in Illinois. The Peoria Journal-Star had the confusing headline to this story, "Victories for both sides of gun debate". Here's a quote:

Illinois lawmakers handed victories to both sides of the gun-control issue Monday, approving a measure that cracks down on gun shows but making it easier for people to transport weapons.

The House voted 89-28 to close a loophole that allows people to buy firearms at gun shows without going through the normal criminal-background check. Minutes later, lawmakers approved a provision that would let gun owners travel the state with their weapons without having to comply with communities' stricter rules on safe gun storage.

Both bills go to Gov. Rod Blagojevich, who pledged to sign the gun show bill. He said he would veto an earlier version that would have also required the destruction of gun purchase records.

Certainly the Brady Bunch are happy that the so-called "gun-show loophole" has been closed. I've written that I have mixed feelings about it. Almost all dealers at gun-shows are FFL licensed and already run the NICS instant check on purchases. This bill would prevent individuals from selling to each other, say, outside in the parking lot. Unfortunately, it could (probably) also be used to declare that any group of friends who get together almost anywhere (the range or someone's living room) and swap or sell guns could also be called a "gun show" and require them to find a cop or dealer to affect the transfer.

Why am I concerned? You can find the text of the bill here. Here's the part that bothers me:

"Gun show" means the entire premises provided for an event or function, including but not limited to parking areas for the event or function, that is sponsored to facilitate, in whole or in part, the purchase, sale, offer for sale, or collection of firearms at which:

(1) 25 or more firearms are offered or exhibited for sale, transfer, or exchange; or

(2) not less than 3 gun show vendors exhibit, sell, offer for sale, transfer, or exchange firearms.

"Gun show promoter" means a person who organizes or operates a gun show.

"Gun show vendor" means any person who exhibits, sells, offers for sale, transfers, or exchanges any firearms at a gun show, regardless of whether the person arranges with a gun show promoter for a fixed location from which to exhibit, sell, offer for sale, transfer, or exchange any firearm.

(k) The Department of State Police shall adopt rules to carry out the provisions of this Section.

Emphasis mine.

I can head to the range with a group of co-workers or friends and there will be more than three of us and probably more than 25 firearms between us and other folks there. Is that a "gun show" if some of us are willing "in part" to sell any of our guns?

Are we "vendors" if there are three of us and we show (exhibit) each other our firearms?

I will agree that this bill has narrower definitions than some that have been attempted in other states, but we've seen time-and-again that some cops don't believe in the Second Amendment as it applies to ordinary citizens and are over-zealous to re-interpret various laws.

I would have preferred that one of the definitions of "gun show" include that it was advertised as such, or was held in a public venue where admission is charged, or some other such clause.

An earlier provision to require the police to destroy transfer records after 90-days has been stripped from this passed version of the bill.

As for the other bill mentioned in the article, to unify transport laws so that what is legal (having an unloaded firearm in the trunk of your car) in some parts of the state would now be legal in all municipalities -- I presume that is the "victory" for our side. That is, if you have to drive through Chicago with a pistol in your car, you couldn't be arrested because Chicago bans handgun ownership. This is similar to laws passed in Virginia and Colorado (although Denver continues to fight it) and only makes sense. However, as the article points out:

The other bill, which passed 79-36, would ease rules on gun owners traveling with their weapons. Rep. Brandon Phelps, D-Norris City, said all gun owners should have to comply with the same state law on how guns should be stored, not have to worry about whether they're traveling through a city that has a stricter storage ordinance.

Blagojevich spokeswoman Rebecca Rausch said the governor intends to veto the legislation.

"It is an NRA bill that we believe weakens the restrictions of home rule cities," she said. "It undermines local gun ordinances."

Rather a hollow "victory" if the governor has already declared his intention to veto the legislation.

To explain why bills like this are needed, let me again use the "car analogy" in a hypothetical state: In most parts of a state, radar-detectors are legal, but one city (we'll call it "X City") has decided to enact their own ordinance that says they are not. You have to drive from "B City" to "N Township" but the highway passes through "X City" and you forgot or didn't know they had such an ordinance. You are now a criminal subject to arrest if caught with that radar-detector while in "X City". You get the picture...

Incidentally, while the Peoria Journal-Star didn't bother to get any conflicting opinions to the gun show "loophole" bill, reporter Jennifer Miller of the Herald and Review did:

Critics argue the legislation will hurt people who obey the law.

"I just feel that the rights of law-abiding gun owners need to be protected," said state Rep. Bob Flider, D-Mount Zion. "I have a position that law-abiding citizens do not commit crimes."

Lawmakers also claim the bill gives government too much power.

"We have enough laws," said state Rep. Bill Mitchell, R-Forsyth. "I think we need to get to the point that if people commit crimes with a weapon, they enhance their penalties. Some of our Chicago colleagues think the problem is the guns, not vice versa."

Good for her! That's how reporters are supposed to do it.

Yesterday was Memorial Day. While most news outlets focused on stories about our brave soldiers, this past Sunday CBS -- the sewage network -- decided to repeat their lie-filled report on .50 caliber rifles:

[Gun control advocate] Diaz says the .50-caliber rifle made by Barrett and other manufacturers is a menace in the hands of terrorists. "This gun is designed and built to smash things up and to set things on fire," says Diaz. "It’s a battlefield weapon. Yet it is sold as freely on the American civilian market as a .22 bolt action rifle."

What's wrong with Barrett's product?

"I'm glad Ronnie Barrett makes his rifle for our military forces. I think it's a great thing on the battlefield," says Diaz. "I just think that there are certain occasions when we say in our society, this product is such a threat to our health and safety, and in this case, our national security, we will not allow it."

I'm not going to rehash all the lies contained in this piece, first aired in January. Others have done that admirably. I'll just point out (as I did last week) that the .50 caliber rifle has never been implicated in any terrorist attack here in the US and by the way, if we're interested in banning anything that is "such a threat to our health and safety" then surely Diaz would support the ban of swimming-pools and automobiles. Actually, more people have died in cars driven by Ted "the lifeguard" Kennedy then have been shot with a .50 caliber rifle here in this country.

Incidentally, as one of my readers pointed out the other day, is it any coincidence that CBS rebroadcast this as the bill to ban .50 caliber guns works its way through the NY legislature?

Here's what's happening at some other blogs:

John Longenecker views some of the opposition to the confirmation of John Bolton as resulting from his 2A support.

Jed at FreedomSight demonstrates why women and other minorities should be embracing the Second Amendment.

The Techno Gypsy writes about shooting in the rural South. It's not just confined to there, we have public areas where we can pop-a-few here in Vermont.

I have to get this posted now. Thanks, everybody, for stopping by!

Posted by Jeff Soyer at May 31, 2005 09:20 AM