Alphecca

Weekly Check on the Bias

Welcome to the May 16th edition of the Weekly Check on the Bias, where I examine some of the coverage by media of gun rights and the Second Amendment.

I'd like to start with a mention of PBS's Antiques Roadshow, a series I often watch, and -- unlike most of the shows on that network -- one that has often featured appraisals of old firearms without any anti-gun commentary. If the producers were "anti-gun" they probably wouldn't include those appraisals to begin with. The current series was filmed in Rhode Island last year and in last week's episode featured:

From WGBH:

...and a rifle, powder horn, and logbook — attributed to Welcome Mathewson, one of the premier New England gunsmiths of the early 19th century — handed down through seven generations of a Rhode Island family, valued at $100,000–$120,000.

If you didn't see it, I urge you to catch the re-run. I couldn't find a large photo from the show but the Mathewson rifle is absolutely gorgeous and in near perfect condition. The owner is a descendent of Welcome Mathewson. She says the rifle has been in her family the whole time and that she's admired it for years. It was quite clear from the episode that she was proud of her family's heritage.

New York City goes on the offensive. And so they've filed lawsuits against 15 gun stores (interestingly, almost all of them are pawn shops, not gun dealers per se) that, in an undercover sting by NYC lawyers sold handguns to "straw purchasers". From the AP:

The city is suing 15 out-of-state gun shops it says supply a significant portion of the guns that flow into New York, including some that end up in the hands of criminals.

The lawsuit being filed Monday asks the federal court to order supervision and extra training for the dealers in Georgia, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina and Virginia. It also seeks some damages and compensation.

"By and large, most gun dealers respect and follow the law, but the small group of dealers that do not should be held accountable," Mayor Michael Bloomberg said in a statement.

For some reason, I always thought it was the province of the BATF to police gun dealers but here we have greedy lawyers from NYC conducting their own "Dateline" style investigations using data provided by the ATF before a bill in Congress put a stop to all of that.

Here's how the sting was conducted, from Law.com:

The suit also describes scenarios in which two private investigators, usually a man and a woman, arrive at a store and ask about guns. The man does all the talking and pays, while the woman fills out the paperwork used for a background check. The city said its purchases had many of the hallmarks defined in a guide created by a gun trade group, "Don't Lie for the Other Guy: A Retailer's Guide to Recognizing and Deterring Straw Purchases."

"Despite the receipt of materials on straw purchases, Defendants have intentionally or negligently failed to instruct their employees to recognize the obvious indicators of a straw purchase," the complaint alleges.

I am not here to defend these "gotcha'd" dealers -- if they are in fact guilty -- but again, NYC should have turned the results of this "operation" over to the BATF and let them deal with it. Of course, there's no money in that and regardless of the "Protection of Lawful Commerce...Act" there IS that negligence clause within it that allows for a suit like this, I guess.

The National Rifle Association has not commented (as I write this) other than to say:

"As a matter of policy, we are opposed to straw purchases," the NRA said. "They [straw purchases] are against the law. Until we receive further information, we will withhold further comment."

That's about all any of us can say. By the way, when a father buys his son his first .22 rifle, is that a straw purchase? How about when a husband/wife buys a pistol for their spouse? Just asking...

Canada doesn't know what they want... I mentioned yesterday (see preceding post) that a new survey showed that a majority of Canadians favor scrapping the current long gun registry but replacing it with a revised one. Regardless, or perhaps for their own misguided good, Stephen Harper's conservative government is going to eliminate it anyway. From Canadian TV News:

Canada's controversial gun registry will undergo big changes starting on Tuesday, CTV News has learned.

The government of Stephen Harper will give the RCMP responsibility to register and keep track of guns in Canada.

And the types of guns being registered will also change. From now on only handguns and semi-automatic weapons will be placed on the list.

"Whatever the government decides, obviously we will support in any way we can," RCMP commissioner Giuliano Zaccardelli said.

On Tuesday, Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day will begin the changes by announcing an amnesty for rifle and shotgun owners, a group of people who have long criticized the registry for targeting law-abiding hunters and collectors.

Nice of the RCMP to support the government. Actually, this isn't all that big a change since I guess semi-automatic rifles will still be covered. All the usual suspects are griping, of course:

Despite controversy and cost overruns, the gun registry has supporters. Police consult the firearms databank approximately 5,000 times every day and officers say limiting the types of guns listed will not help law enforcement.

"Our last six or seven police officers were killed with long guns," said Tony Cannavino of the Canadian Professional Police Association. "That's very sad."

Gun control activist Wendy Cukier said: "The only reason they would proceed to dismantle a system that is working as well as this one is to pay back the gun lobby."

All this registry did was to tell the cops whom the gun was stolen from, not who committed a crime with it. Furthermore, the registry was used by cops to confiscate guns from people they deemed "not fit" to have one. Naturally, it was only their judgement that counted. From the Globe and Mail:

A 2004 report from the Commissioner of Firearms that was released without much publicity detailed the increased number of hits the registry was getting from police departments. Patrol officers routinely run names and addresses through the registry to see if they might encounter a gun when responding to a domestic disturbance or break-in, Chief La Barge said.

The Canadian Firearms Centre has also used it to get recreational weapons, such as hunting rifles, out of the hands of the mentally ill, he said. In 2004, according to the commissioner's report, 2,500 gun licences were revoked and 550 licences were refused.

It would be interesting to know what criteria they used to decide that 2,500 citizens were mentally ill. As for Chief La Barge's remarks, aren't cops supposed to always expect to face a firearm when responding to a call?

The drumbeats for more gun control are alive and well here in the US, too.

Virginia congressman calls for .50 caliber ban. You'll be shocked, shocked to learn he's a Democrat. From WTOP News:

Virginia Congressman Jim Moran and Virginians Against Handgun Violence are stepping up efforts to ban 50-caliber sniper rifles.

Congressman Moran has introduced legislation, H.R. 654, that would prohibit the sale or transfer of 50-caliber sniper rifles, and require those types of rifles already in private collections to be registered under the National Firearms Act.

The Congressman and Virginians Against Handgun Violence are also trying to reinstate the assault weapons ban that lapsed in September, 2004.

The assault weapons ban, signed by President Clinton in 1994, outlawed 19 types of assault weapons. A clause directed that the ban expire unless Congress specifically reauthorized it, which it did not.

Moran says laws would help keep certain types of weapons out of the hands of criminals and terrorists.

Did the un-named writer of this piece decide to call them "sniper rifles" on his own or was he just reading the VAHV press release? This is all so pathetic since the .50 caliber BMG rifles out there are so heavy and unwieldy that no criminal in their right mind is going to lug these things around to commit a crime. The LACK of anecdotal stories about crimes committed with these guns ought to clue the clueless that they aren't a problem. But it makes for good headlines as the 2006 elections round the corner.

Fairfax, VA Board wants AWB back as well. From NBC4 (DC):

The Fairfax County Board of Supervisors wants Congress to reinstate the assault weapons ban that expired in 2004 following last week's assault at a county police station.

The request was made Monday in the wake of the death of Detective Vicky Armel, who police say was shot to death by Michael Kennedy, who was carrying weapons like an AK-47 style assault rifle, a hunting rifle and five handguns.

Officer Michael Garbarino was also shot during the attack in the parking lot of the Sully District station last week in Chantilly, Va. He remains in critical condition.

The board was originally asked to support a bill being sponsored by Rep. Jim Moran, which would prohibit the sale of 50-caliber sniper rifles.

However, some board members were hesitant to support the Moran bill because they weren't sure what weapons would be banned.

The fact is, Michael Kennedy was a psychotic, suicidal mutant who broke out of a mental institution, returned to his parents' home where, their claims not-withstanding, police found loaded and unsecured firearms laying all over the place:

Fairfax County police seized nine firearms and six pellet guns from the family's Centreville townhouse, according to search warrant documents. All of the guns found in the home were unsecured, some propped up against hallway walls, and two were loaded, including a 9mm handgun beneath a master bedroom mattress, according to the documents. Knives were also at various locations in the home, including under a loveseat cushion in the living room.

Lawyers for his parents issued a statement:

All firearms in the townhouse where Kennedy, 18, lived with his parents and 9-year-old sister were locked in two secure containers, according to a statement issued by the law firm representing Brian and Margaret Kennedy.

"The family can only surmise that their son broke into one of the containers prior to going to the Sully District station. Any indication that loaded firearms were routinely left around the residence is simply false and untrue," the statement from MacDowell & Associates said.

So who is telling the truth? If the police are... It's not my business to tell others how to live or keep their guns but since since Michael Kennedy had only just been checked into the institution, we presume he was at home the night before. If these guns really were locked-up, did the parents, after committing their son, suddenly scatter all the firearms around, under mattresses, etc? And if they weren't secured, why not? If you have a nutcase son staying at home, you don't leave loaded guns lying around. Again, I don't know whether they were or weren't locked up. I only present my opinions here. [Giving yourself a legal out, Jeff? -ed.][Better believe it! -js]

I will tell you this, irresponsible gun owners can be their own worst enemy. I don't know what chance a new AWB has in Congress but if one should slip through, President Bush will sign it and stories like these are one reason.

I'll also repeat what I've said before: Americans are weary of Republican control of Congress and are likely to hand the House and Senate over to Democrats. You can expect to see a new AWB this coming January. Better buy what you want before then. I sure as hell plan to.

Stories like the above are also one reason you might start to see more "safe storage" bills advancing in various legislatures.

Tax-free gun locks. Okay, maybe it covers gun safes, too. In California, a bill supported by the NRA just passed the House and heads to the Senate. From the California Chronicle:

Assemblywoman Nicole M. Parra (D-Hanford), today, announced the passage of AB 2096 out of the Assembly Revenue and Taxation Committee by a bi-partisan vote of 5-2. AB 2096 would exempt gun safety devices from state sales and use taxes.

“Not applying sales and use taxes to gun safety devices makes it that much less cumbersome for gun owners to purchase such devices,” said Assemblywoman Parra. “I really do believe that over the course of time, AB 2096 will reduce the number of firearm related injuries in our communities.”

“AB 2096 will help local citizen groups purchase and distribute firearm safety devices to millions of California firearm owners,” said Ed Worley, California State Liaison for the National Rifle Association (NRA). “It is also important to note that this bill will help augment local and community safety training programs.”

I will never come down on anything that helps safely store guns in a home. I recommend it to anyone with kids. I just don't want to see it become compulsory by law. I live alone and keep a firearm on the nightstand. If I had to keep it in a safe, fumbling with a combination when I'm suddenly awakened by the sound of someone breaking into my home could lose me valuable seconds in protecting myself. These are decisions best left to homeowners. Most of them are smart enough NOT to leave loaded firearms around a home where someone who is mentally ill is residing.

Neighbor shoots burglar. This guy takes his house-sitting duties seriously! From the Muskegon Chronicle (MI):

Armed with two handguns while watching a neighbor's house, a man shot an alleged burglar and held another at gunpoint Friday until police arrived.

Neighbors said the suspects -- an 18-year-old from Wyoming who was shot in the lower back and his 17-year-old accomplice -- got what was coming to them.

The pair was warned twice earlier this week to stay away from the rural residential area in northeast Kent County, neighbors said.

"You might say the third time is a charm, as far as I'm concerned," said Charlie Seibold, who was at a friend's house when the men stumbled into the driveway and announced one was shot. "They probably thought they were out in the country and that they could slip in and slip out without being noticed.

"Well, that's not the way it works around here," Siebold said.

Police said the shooter, identified by Seibold and his friend, Ward Smith, as Mark Diamond, watched as the men drove a stolen van to the rear of the home. They then tried to break in, according to Diamond's account to police. Diamond shot, then chased them to Smith's yard, where they stopped running, investigators said.

The 18-year-old was critically wounded, police said. The 17-year-old, from Grand Rapids, was unhurt. Kent County Sheriff's Department officials did not release their names.

[...]

Police did not take Diamond into custody, and sheriff's Lt. Roger Parent said it will be up to Prosecutor Bill Forsyth to determine if he should be charged once detectives complete their probe.

Forsyth could not be reached for comment, but his recent rulings largely have been on the side of homeowners and merchants who have felt threatened by people allegedly committing crimes.

I really like the thoughts of Charlie Seibold and others that we are all responsible for watching out for each other. There are too many punk mutants out there wanting to steal what belongs to us.

Guns or Culture? Following the killing of famous skier Corinne Rey-Bellet by her husband, the Swiss are having some angst over gun control. From the BBC:

The Swiss media tend to call cases like this "family dramas", in which a man kills his wife, often his own children, and himself.

Family slaughter might be a more accurate term - there have been 14 such cases in Switzerland in the last 11 months.

"There is a profile for a man who commits a crime like this," says Philip Jaffe, professor of psychology at Geneva University.

"He tends to be very ambitious, but isolated, very contained, and he can't cope with loss. So if his wife threatens to leave him, his response is violence."

[...]

A recent study indicated that 58% of all murders in Switzerland were within the family. In the Netherlands, also a peaceful, prosperous Western European country, the figure is 29%.

[Martin Boess, head of Switzerland's crime prevention unit.] ...blames the Swiss army's policy of requiring Swiss men, who all have to do military service, to keep their guns and ammunition at home in case of an emergency call-up.

What that means is that nearly all Swiss men have a Sturmgewehr - an assault rifle - stored somewhere in their homes.

Those who make it to officer level have an automatic pistol too, and when men leave the army, they are allowed to keep their guns. No licence is required.

"If things go wrong, he can go upstairs, get the gun, and shoot," says Mr Boess.

In most of Switzerland's "family dramas", an army gun is used. Stadler shot his famous wife with his officer's pistol.

"It's very common to hear women tell how their husbands remind them they have a gun in moments of tension," says Brigitte Schnegg, professor of gender politics at Berne University.

"They'll say: 'If you don't do what I want, don't forget I've got my gun upstairs.'"

It's the gun, not the person flipping out. Got it? In point of fact, murder by any means is rather rare in Switzerland (a nation with a high percentage of firearms ownership) and a sudden up-tick in family murders could be a statistical anomaly in a small country. If someone shoots someone criminally in Vermont, our statistics look like they've jumped when in fact the state is one of the safest in the US.

I rather prefer the reasoning of Nancy Salvato:

I propose that there is a third theory which might explain the reason for senseless homicide/suicide, senseless because a person of sane mind would understand that with courage and conviction, seemingly insurmountable problems can be overcome; just not as quickly as many in this culture of fast food and sitcom attention spans would want.

She then directs the reader to the following Paul Craig Roberts article:

Why did shootings unrelated to criminal gain become both thinkable and doable? Deranged, frustrated, disappointed and bitter people have been around forever, but motiveless killings are a new phenomenon in our culture.

In order for a person to take out his frustrations and disappointments on innocents, he must escape a culture that inculcates traditional ideas of right and wrong, and thus be "liberated" from a sense of personal responsibility and morality.

Moral relativism and the entangling web of the mundane trappings of our entitlement society have allowed these heinous acts of senseless violence to creep into our culture only to be explained away by a society that believes everyone is a victim and therefore not responsible for acts committed. No matter how it is rationalized, people kill people, guns don’t kill people.

[...]

Students learn from liberals that everything is relative . In the liberals' view, to pass judgment is to be an intolerant "moral absolutist," whereas the desired norm is to be an open, tolerant, nonjudgmental person. Even though students don't approve of such things as slavery and human sacrifice, they have learned to see moral judgments as arbitrary, ethnocentric and politically incorrect.

The cause of violence is not guns but people who grow up in a culture that knows no right or wrong. (Nonjudgmentalism is forsaken only when it comes to animal rights, "minority" rights, and environmentalism. In these three arenas students are permitted moral absolutism.)

In the days before people's sense of self became narcissistic, bad behavior could destroy a person's self esteem, ruin his reputation, and harm the reputation of his family and hometown. Today bad behavior is rewarded with book contracts and stardom.

It is the change in culture that explains the shootings. Liberals changed our culture. Finding no fault in themselves, liberals blame guns.

Wow! Liberals will huff-and-puff and say the gun is "the enabler". But when I was growing up in the fifties and sixties and even the early seventies, I could wander all over NYC by myself and never feel threatened, even in so-called "bad neighborhoods". Street gangs "rumbled" but guns and shootings were rare. There were plenty of guns around in peoples' homes in those days but no one thought to use them. Now they do. Perhaps liberal ideology is to blame.

Update: Thanks to the pointer of blogger Ken Summers for this Time Magazine story about a new shooter:

Three months after I joined a shooting club, I've learned not to jump when the gun does. But I'm still being surprised, and not just by the bang or the occasional bullseye. When I tell friends about my new interest (O.K., obsession), the conversation chills. It's as if I've taken up voodoo: they'll still talk to me, just not about It. "I just don't like guns," says one. "Don't like the idea of them." In the days when the only unholstered guns I'd seen were in the movies, I might have said the same. Guns for me equaled danger and crime. Even after I started shooting, I had a lingering sense that the rifle or pistol, even the brass rounds I was pressing into its magazine, might explode at any moment. I still handle guns with caution—the first rule of firearms safety is to treat every gun as if it's loaded. But I now know that to call them evil, as Australian Prime Minister John Howard recently did, is a statement of good-hearted ignorance.

Guns aren't moral agents, they're machines—elegant, superbly efficient, made to fit the human hand. I now think it entirely possible that the American gunsmith John Moses Browning "sitteth," as his admirers say, "at the right hand of God." Shooting for sport isn't, as I once thought, the desperate outlet of sad Hemingway types, but a fiendishly difficult art. As Peter, a former naval officer, says, "It's got all the Zen you could want." Trying to hit a bullseye smaller than a saucer from a distance of 100 m or more—and do it over and over again—demands things of you, and gives things to you. You have to align yourself not just with the gun and the target but with your surroundings: light must be taken into account (people tend to aim lower in dim light), temperature (on a hot day the bullet flies faster and higher), and wind. "Three minutes," says Ian, an Army weapons instructor turned lawyer. He means that to counter today's stiff easterly, he'll move his horizontal sight three-60ths of a degree to the left. Shooting is all about precision, he says. And consistency. And tenacity, says David, an engineer who won a U.S. sniper-rifle championship last year. "Don't let anything faze you. Breathe. Relax. If you do a bad shot, forget it. Put everything you've got into the next one." The reward of total concentration: total relaxation. Even when I score poorly, shooting makes me forget everything else in the world.

[...]

It was seeing civilians targeted en masse that made Grant take up shooting. "9/11 was a defining moment for me," says the computer consultant. "I thought, if things are going to get this crazy, I'd rather know how to use a gun than not." David regrets the passing of an Australia that, in time of war, could draw on a huge pool of citizen marksmen. "We lost that after Vietnam," he says. With it went not just skills but a cast of mind. "Given the choice," says Ian, "I would always employ a shooter over a non-shooter. A good shooter is responsible, he's careful. He thinks about what he's doing, and when it's over he thinks about how to do it better." Says Alan, a teacher: "The art on the range, on the job, in life, is to aim and to hit exactly the target, the one target, the only target, dead center, with one round." Clearly, I have a lot of practicing to do. But shooting has taught me that while to err may be human, to aim true is almost divine.

Great article. I wonder if it's only in the Time Pacific edition. I wonder if the insufferable Andrew Sullivan will respond in his Time blog...

So many pro-2A bloggers have offered this but all of you really should. Encourage your "non-gun" friends to join you at the range. It really is an addicting hobby.

Hey, I better get this posted. Naturally I'll be yacking about it all with Cam Edwards this afternoon. Also, naturally, I thank you so much for stopping by.

Posted by Jeff Soyer at May 16, 2006 11:48 AM