The 1824 University of Virginia Ban on the Keeping of Weapons on Campus by Students

 

Much has been made of an 1824 University of Virginia ban on the keeping of weapons on campus by students. The resolution was passed on October 4, 1824, about five months before classes were started at the University. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, both former presidents and elder statesmen, were members of the board and attending when the resolutions were passed. The portions of the resolutions concerning weapons are contained in this excerpt, with the weapons passages in bold:

No Student shall admit any disturbing noises in his room, or make them any where within the precincts the University, or fire a gun or pistol within the same, on pain of such minor sentence as the faculty shall decree or approve. but the proper use of musical instruments, shall be freely allowed in their rooms, and in that appropriated for instruction of music.

Riotous, disorderly, intemperate or indecent conduct of any student within the precincts shall be punished by interdiction of a residence within the precincts; and repetitions of such offences, by expulsion from the University.

Fighting with weapons which may inflict death, or a challenge to such fight, given or accepted, shall be punished by instant expulsion from the University, not remissible by the Faculty; and it shall be the duty of the Proctor to give information thereof to the civil magistrate, that the parties may be dealt with according to law.

Offences cognisable by the laws of the land shall be left to the cognisance of the civil magistrate, if claimed by him, or otherwise to the judgment of the Faculty: all others to that of the Faculty. and such of these as are not specially designated in the enactments of the Visitors may be subjected by the Faculty to any of the minor punishments permitted by these enactments.

Sentences of expulsion from the University (except in the case of challenge or combat with arms) shall not be final until approved by the board of Visitors or, when they are not in session, by a majority of them, separately consulted. but residence within the precincts, and attendance on the schools may be suspended in the mean time.

No Student shall, within the precincts of the University, introduce, keep or use any spirituous or vinous liquors, keep or use weapons or arms of any kind, or gunpowder, keep a servant, horse or dog, appear in school with a stick, or any weapon, nor, while in school, be covered without permission of the Professor, nor use tobacco by smoking or chewing, on pain of any of the minor punishments at the discretion of the Faculty, or of the board of Censors, approved by the Faculty.

Military instruction was required for three hours on each Saturday, with arms provided by the University.

Several things about the ban on all weapons at the University of Virginia are clear. The ban only applied to students. It did not apply to staff or to the public. The ban only applied on campus. The ban did not have any criminal penalties. It was a rule of the University, with penalties only enforceable because the students had voluntarily entered into a voluntary association, that of students at the University.

People who attempt to justify modern bans on firearms at schools or universities often cite the University of Virginia rule as a historical precedent. It is a poor precedent because:

• The University of Virginia ban was not a law.
• It was a rule which only applied to students.
• The University of Virginia ban only applied "within the precincts of the University".

Voluntary associations can make their own rules. If a person does not like the rules, they can leave the association. Students can read the rules before they enter a university. Laws are to apply to everyone.

In the Constitutional challenge to the federal Gun Free School Zone Act in Montana, the Assistant United States Attorney, Thomas K. Godfrey claims the University of Virginia ban on weapons possession by students is a precedent. From the brief:

1824. The University of Virginia Board of Visitors—whose six members included Thomas Jefferson and James Madison—resolved that: “No Student shall, within the precincts of the University, ... keep or use weapons or arms of any kind, or gunpowder[.]” UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA BOARD OF VISITORS MINUTES, at 6-7 (Oct. 1824).

Bans on students possessing weapons within the precincts of the University are not a precedent for bans on everyone possessing firearms outside of a school.

©2023 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

 

CA: Resident Fatally Shoots Intruder

A Vallejo resident shot and killed a man who allegedly tried to break into his house Monday morning.

The shooting happened at about 9:40 a.m. near Georgia and Monterey streets.

NBC Bay Area tried to speak with the resident, but he didn't want to talk about what happened.

More Here

NE: Domestic Defense Gunfight, Ex Boyfriend Killed

Kleine tells 6 News ONeal came to the house of a woman with whom he has a child threatening to shoot her new boyfriend and bust out his car windows. Investigators said he entered the home with his gun out; the boyfriend took out his gun and they apparently fired simultaneously. The shot fired at ONeal killed him.

More Here

Gun Free School Zone Case in Montana USA - Metcalf Game On!

 Vivian and Gabriel's modest home in Billings, Montana

In the USA v Metcalf case in Montana, the Gun Free School Zone Act (GFSZA) has a challenge in federal court. it is full-fledged game on! The case was covered early and in depth by AmmoLand. It seems such a slam-dunk for the Second Amendment, a major question was: would the United States Attorney for Montana see the case as a loser, and rather than risk a major Second Amendment win, simply dismiss the case?

AmmoLand was one of the first to cover the USA v Metcalf case. AmmoLand coverage has been far better than any other outlet. Russel A. Hart is the Assistant Federal Defender in the Billings Branch Office. He is representing Gabriel Metcalf. He filed a motion to dismiss the indictment against Gabriel Metcalf, then filed the brief in support of the motion to dismiss. The Brief was filed on October 10, 2023.

The USA filed their response on October 24. They are proceeding with the GFSZA case.

The defense of Gabriel Metcalf is premised on two major points. First is the defense established under Montana law, which creates an exemption from the GRSZA in Montana, for all who can legally own firearms. From the brief by Hart:

Montana has (1) verified that any individual who is not prohibited under the laws of Montana or who has not been convicted ofa violent felony crime is qualified to receive a license to carry a firearm within a school zone, (2) enacted legislation granting such a license to all verified individuals, (3) explicitly stated that this license applies for purposes of “the federal Gun-Free School Zones Act”, and (4) enacted separate legislation that goes farther than §922(q) could under its Commerce Clause authority, prohibiting the possession of any type of“weapon”, including a firearm,but only within the school building itself.

If Mr. Metcalf stepped from his property onto the public sidewalks while carrying a firearm as the Government alleges, he was licensed to do by the State of Montana at the time, the prohibition of §922(q)(2)(A) does not apply to him, and the Indictment must be dismissed.

As expected, Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) Godfrey claims the Montana law is not sufficient. From the brief by Godfrey:

The Montana law that Metcalf relies upon, Mont. Code Ann. § 45-8-360, includes express qualifications for a person to be “considered to be individually licensed” for purposes of the exceptions to the Gun-Free School Zones Act: excluding individuals (1) convicted of a violent, felony crime,” or (2) otherwise not “able to own or to possess a firearm under the Montana constitution.” The statute, however, does not require that law enforcement authorities of the state verify that the individual meets those qualifications before obtaining a license. Because the Montana provision does not meet the federal requirements for the exemption to apply, Metcalf’s firearm possession was not exempted.

Next is the basic Second Amendment defense under Heller and Bruen. The GFSZA is unconstitutional on its face. From the brief by Hart:

When it comes to firearms carried for purposes of self-defense outside the home,922(q) contains an identical ban to the one flatly struck down in Heller when applied to firearms stored inside the home.In Bruen,the Court ruled that regulations concerning firearms carried outside the home must be held to the Heller standard while unequivocally rejecting the application of any “means-end”scrutiny to justify the regulation. Bruen, at 2129. The ban prohibiting possession of a functional firearm within 1,000 feet of a school’s “grounds” in §922(q)(2)(A) prevents a citizen from using it for self-defense if confrontation happens outside their home. On its face,§922(q) is impossible to square with the Second Amendment in the post-means-end scrutiny era of Heller and Bruen.

AUSA Godfrey claims the Second Amendment does not apply for two reasons. He claims schools are exempted from the Second Amendment. He claims there is historical evidence bans on firearms existed on public universities when the Second Amendment was ratified, and there were late 19th century regulations on firearms near schools. Here are two relevant excerpts:

His claim under the Second Amendment fails for two reasons, either of which is sufficient to deny relief. First, the Second Amendment does not protect Metcalf’s “course of conduct.” Bruen, 142 S. Ct. at 2134. The Supreme Court has repeatedly made clear that the government may prohibit “the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings.”

The Founding generation heavily regulated firearms on the campus of public universities. And starting in the latter half of the 19th century, some States heavily regulated firearms in and near schools. In some ways the restrictions were narrower than Section 922(q)(2). But in other ways they were broader, and there was no apparent dispute about their constitutionality. Further, under Bruen, a modern-day restriction need not be a “dead ringer for historical precursors.” Id. at 2133. It need only be “relevantly similar” to the precursors in “how” and “why” it burdens the “right to armed self-defense.” Id. at 2132-2133. Section 922(q)(2) passes that test.

The Metcalf case is an excellent test case. Gabriel Metcalf has a clean record. He lives across the street from the school in question. He had valid reasons to carry a firearm for purposes of defense of self and his mother.

While Federal Defender Hart is doing a high quality job in the legal defense of Gabriel Metcalf in the GFSZA case, the burdens on the Metcalf family are considerable. The City of Billings found a three year old warrant about a confrontation where Gabriel was defending his mother. On the initial appearance before a local judge, Gabriel was required to wear an ankle GPS monitor, at a cost of about $300 a month. The local public defender is no Russel Hart. From Gabriel's mother, contact before the court, a few days ago, consisted of a couple of minutes. No attempt was made to ask for removal of the GPS monitor. The attitude of the public defender verged on hostile.

The family needs funds to hire an attorney, preferably one who is not dependent on the "good old boy" network inside of Billings for their subsistence.  Vivian Metcalf has set up a GiveSendGo account, the YoungMetcalfHomeDefenseFund.

Analysis:

The advantage the Biden administration, represented by AUSA Godfrey, has is the case falls under the jurisdiction of the Ninth Circuit.  If Metcalf prevails in Montana, the case will be appealed to the Ninth Circuit.

The case is clear cut. There is no historical record for banning guns simply because they are within a thousand feet of a school. The university bans near the time of the ratification of the Bill of Rights were for private institutions. They only applied to students. They only applied to actual school grounds. The single law from late in the 19th century did not ban guns near schools. It banned shooting guns near schools. The Montana law gives a clear exception, to the GFSZA, but there is some question about whether it is sufficient under the GFSZA.

Gabriel is out of jail, without bond for the GFSZA charge. The City of Billings charge is for a misdemeanor assault charge, about three years old, which seems questionable to this correspondent. It seems likely the GPS ankle bracelet requirement could be revoked, if Gabriel receives the benefit of vigorous counsel. The local case may be dismissed if appropriate discovery and full airing of evidence is conducted before a judge.

©2023 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

 

CA: Suspect flees into Home, is Shot

Deputies saw the vehicle disabled in the middle of the roadway after it struck with a parked vehicle. Deputies saw the alleged suspect, described as a man in his 50s, fleeing into a nearby home. There, he began fighting with the home’s occupants. One of the residents pulled out a gun and fired on the suspect at least once. Leibee said the suspect was taken to a hospital with an injury not considered life-threatening.

More Here

MA: Employee Shoots Man who Threatened him with a Knife. Both Arrested

Brockton police said the shooter, identified by police as 18-year-old Khamani K. Anderson, turned himself in at the police department shortly after 9 a.m. Monday and was placed in custody.

Anderson is expected to appear in Brockton District Court later Monday on charges of assault and battery with a dangerous weapon, discharging a firearm within 500 feet of a building, possession of a loaded firearm during a felony and improper storage of a firearm.

Police said they were able to talk to the man who was shot on Sunday at the hospital. Their preliminary investigation revealed the shooting victim pulled a knife on an Ocean State Job Lot worker and the employee then pulled out a gun and shot the man.

The shooting victim, identified as 26-year-old Brandon C. Theodat, is also facing charges, including assault and battery with a dangerous weapon (knife), disturbing the peace and disorderly conduct. He also had an previous warrant for his arrest. He remains hospitalized but is expected to survive.

More Here

Israel Hands out Weapons. American Left Organizes Gun Turn-in Events

Israeli women reservists train with M16 rifles. No magazines are in the rifles.

A recent video on X, formerly known as Twitter, shows Israeli officials handing out what appear to be M-4 or similar versions of the American M-16 type rifle to non-uniformed Israelis. Israel suffered thousands of casualties in the October 7 raid/invasion and massacres conducted by Hamas. The raid showed how vulnerable a disarmed population is against lightly armed and armored adversaries. The Israeli government had long practiced a staple of socialist regimes: disarm the population to enforce a doctrine of a monopoly of force by the government.

This renders the population vulnerable to the types of raid conducted by Hamas or to mass murder in gun free zones such as seen in the United States, France, Russia, or all over the globe. If there are locally armed populations, they can reduce casualties tremendously, through armed defense. Their capability is multiplied if they are backed up by quick response forces, either military or police.

At the time of the successful Hamas raid into Israel, less than 2% of the Israeli population had access to small arms. It has been reported 148,000 Israelis had permits to carry. The population or Israel has been reported at 9.7 million. 148,000 Israelis are 1.5% of the Israeli population.

In one account, published on X, formerly known as Twitter, an Israeli special forces officer, who was allowed to have a Glock 19 and some spare magazines, in his home, killed 10-14 Hamas attackers.  Many, many of the other members of his kibbutz were killed or taken hostage. At about 10:18 minute into the video, his wife says:

My husband is a big hero.  He's a big hero and we're lucky. It's hard for me to say it. Because Many of the homes, many of the families, they didn't have a gun or a weapon with which to protect themselves. 

We were lucky. Maybe a little destiny. Maybe some providence. I'm not religious, but maybe.

According to research done by John Lott, 94% of mass public murders are committed in gun free zones.  Because of significant information/intelligence gathering by Hamas, the Hamas raiders knew just what to expect where they were raiding, down to who did or did not own what kind of dog.  The intelligence gathering by Hamas gave them the equivalent of a map of "gun free" zones. It is unlikely the Hamas gambit will be allowed to work in the near future, though it is a historically common one.  Israel has learned an important lesson in reality.

 When someone repeatedly says they want to kill you, take them at their word.

Those pushing to disarm populations claim disarmed populations are safer than armed populations. Historically, disarmed populations do not last long. They are conquered, looted, the women raped and subjugated, others sold into slavery.  If there is a strong, armed protector, disarmed people can live in peace. They are at the mercy of the armed "protector".  Limits on government power, such as the Second Amendment, are designed to limit the damage out of control armed "protectors" can do. Historically, they are capable of enormous damage.

The push for gun turn-in events "buybacks" is in stark contrast to the Israeli officials handing out small arms to citizen-protectors.

Proponents of gun turn-in events claim the "buyback" might prevent a suicide or accident. Academic studies do not support this claim. Those likely to turn guns in are unlikely candidates for crime, accidents, or suicides. If guns are not available to commit suicides, other lethal methods are easily substituted. In Australia, popular substitutes were hanging and single vehicle crashes, instruments easily available in modern society.

 

Long guns turned into the police in Phoenix, Arizona in 2013

Gun turn-in events, often designated by the Orwellian term "buyback", are based on the premise removing a few guns from society might do some good. Evidence indicates "buybacks" may do some harm.  The major effect is to send a message: Guns are bad. Turn them in. At many gun turn-in events, private buyers send the opposite message: Guns are valuable. I pay cash.

The premise of gun "buybacks" is guns are bad. More guns, more bad. The Hamas raid, the Israeli casualties, and mass murder in gunfree zones in the USA show guns are often necessary as a means of defense.  Guns are often used for good. The state cannot have its armed agents everywhere to defend you. The state may become your enemy. There are people in the world who want to murder, steal, and rape. It is the base human condition.

The policy which has lately been followed by the United States, and Israel to a lesser extent, is: if we treat those who want to kill us well, and make clear there are economic advantages to peaceful coexistence, those who want to kill us will learn to coexist. This not a viable lesson from history. The same ideology claims weapons drive wars. The claim is if people get rid of weapons, wars (or interpersonal violence) will cease, or at least be significantly reduced.  It is a false claim.

Economics is not the only, or even the most significant motivator in human affairs. It is arguable, for the past 150 years, non-economic motivators have been much more important.

Weapons do not create desires to murder, steal, and rape. As is so often the case, leftists reverse the arrow of causality. The human desire to murder, steal, and rape creates the need for humans to have weapons for defense.

 ©2023 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

FL: Manhunt ends with Residents Holding Suspect at Gunpoint

The sheriff's office says during the traffic stop, McMillian stopped the truck and ran away on foot.

About 30 minutes later, the sheriff's office says deputies were led to Campbells Rest Road where three residents were holding McMillian at gunpoint.

More Here

New York District Judge: Subjective Judgements are not Permissible Basis for Denying Second Amendment Rights

 New York City, 2016

 

In 2018, Joseph Srour applied for a license to possess rifles and shotguns at his home in New York City. He was denied. In 2019, he applied for a license to possess handguns in his home. He was denied. The denials involved application of the issuing authorities subjective judgement on Srour's moral character and the subjective judgement of the issuing authorities determination of "good cause".  Joseph Srour appealed the decision. After the Bruen decision by the Supreme Court, he amended his appeal to a direct (facial) challenge of the constitutionality of New York City law. The Case is known as Srour v New York City.

On October 24, 2023, United States District Judge John P. Cronan wrote an opinion and  ordered New York City and the NYPD Police Commissioner to not enforce current New York City code 10-303(a)(2) and 10-303(a)(9). Those two provisions of the New York City code are as follows:

(a)Requirements. No person shall be denied a permit to purchase and possess a rifle or shotgun unless the applicant:

(2) is not of good moral character; or 

(9) unless good cause exists for the denial of the permit.

Judge P. Cronan states the "good moral character" and "good cause" provisions are too subjective to be allowed as barriers to the exercise of Second Amendment rights. From the Opinion and Order:

This case is not about the ability of a state or municipality to impose appropriate and constitutionally valid regulations governing the issuance of firearm licenses and permits. The constitutional infirmities identified herein lie not in the City’s decision to impose requirements for the possession of handguns, rifles, and shotguns. Rather, the provisions fail to pass constitutional muster because of the magnitude of discretion afforded to City officials in denying an individual their constitutional right to keep and bear firearms, and because of Defendants’ failure to show that such unabridged discretion has any grounding in our Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.

"Discretion" is the ability of men to apply the law as they desire, rather than equally and impartially to all. There is always some ability for discretion. It is the amount of discretion which can be pernicious. Most discretion has traditionally been in the ability to not enforce a law, rather than the ability to deny constitutional rights.

Another part of New York City law, challenged by Joseph Srour, is administrative code Section 10-310.  This part of the code does not address the issuance of firearms permits. It provides for penalties for violations of the code's provisions. Judge Cronan did not strike down Section 10-310. In his conclusion, Judge Cronan writes:

For the previously stated reasons, the Court grants Srour’s motion for summary judgment in part and denies it in part. The Court grants summary judgment in favor of Srour on his First, Second, and Third Causes of Action as facial challenges, and dismisses without prejudice any as-applied challenges brought in those Causes of Action. The Court denies Srour’s motion for summary judgment with respect to his facial challenge in the Fourth Cause of Action, and dismisses without prejudice the as-applied challenge brought in that Cause of Action. The Court also dismisses the Fifth Cause of Action without prejudice. In reaching this holding, the Court finds that Srour is entitled to a declaration that subsections (a)(2) and (a)(9) of New York City Administrative Code Section 10-303 are facially unconstitutional. The Court further determines 48 that Srour is entitled to injunctive relief enjoining the enforcement of subsections (a)(2) and (a)(9) of Section 10-303. The stay will remain in effect under midnight on October 26, 2023.

New York City is appealing Judge Cronan's decision to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. The Second Circuit has been nearly as hostile to the Second Amendment as the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Judge Cronan's decision is well written and clear.

 

©2023 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

 

 

MO: Domestic Defense, New Boyfreind Shoots, Kills Old Boyfreind

ST. LOUIS — Police said a man acted in self-defense after he shot and killed an intruder early Friday morning inside a home in north St. Louis.

According to the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department, officers responded to a report of a shooting and burglary just before 1 a.m. Friday to a home in the 4400 block of San Francisco Avenue, located on the edge of St. Louis' Penrose neighborhood.

Police said the 37-year-old man and his 36-year-old girlfriend were asleep in their bed. They woke up to find the woman's ex-boyfriend standing over them with a gun pointed at her current boyfriend. The man grabbed his own gun and shot the suspect multiple times.

The suspect was pronounced dead at the scene, police said, and the man who shot him was taken into police custody. Both guns were recovered at the scene. Police released the suspect's name Saturday. He was John Bernard, 37, and he lived in the 3700 block of Cottage Avenue.

Police said in an afternoon update that the man who shot him acted in self-defense and the shooting appeared to be a "justifiable homicide."

More Here

FL: Victim of Home Invasion Shoots 1 of 3 Invaders

FORT LAUDERDALE, FLA. (WSVN) - Fort Lauderdale Police are investigating following reports that multiple suspects forcibly entered a home and physically assaulted a man inside.

According to authorities, the incident occurred just before 12:30 p.m. at the Progreso Point Apartments, located at 619 North Andrews Avenue.

Police said once the unknown suspects entered the home, in an act of self-defense, the victim managed to retrieve a firearm and shoot one of the intruders.

Before the police could arrive at the scene, the suspects fled the area in an unknown vehicle. The victim sustained serious injuries during the attack and was transported to Broward Health Medical Center.

More Here

FL: Victim Shoots Suspect in Wawa store

Police told News 6 that the shooting happened around 10:40 p.m. inside the Wawa store John Young Parkway at the intersection of Silver Star Road.

The Orlando Police Department said a man, identified as 45-year-old Derek T. Wilson, went up to individuals in the store “in a threatening and erratic manner.”

“The victim was acting in self defense when he shot at the suspect. Multiple witnesses on scene confirmed this,” police said in a release.

More Here

TN: Domestic Defense, Son Shoots Father in Leg

An investigation revealed that Matthew Green was actively assaulting a person in the parking garage at 2120 Clinch Avenue around 9:30 p.m. His son shot him in the leg after giving him multiple warnings to stop the assault, KPD said. 

Jonathan Cooper has been a criminal defense lawyer in Knoxville for 30 years. He said the 17-year-old son will likely not face any charges. 

More Here

California Judge Grants Preliminary Injunction to Protect First Amendment and Gun Shows

 

 

 

 A California federal court judge has ordered a preliminary injunction against enforcement of two California statutes. The statutes ban gun shows at the Orange County Fairgrounds and on any state property in California. Gun shows have been very popular in California for decades.

A Crossroads of the West Gun Show scheduled for November of 2020 was canceled due to Covid 19.

Crossroads of the West, an enormous gun show, has held them in Orange county for over 30 years. They held a show there as late as November 2021.

According to gun show owner Bob Templeton,  on this video, the gun show in Orange County contributed over a million dollars to Orange County revenue. According to Tracy Olcott, who is taking over the Crossroads Gun Show from her parents, the show had been held at the Orange County Fairgounds for 35 years. The Court record shows Crossroads has had a gun show at the Orange County Fairgrounds every year it was possible for the past 30 years.Tracy made the case in the video, the proposed legislation is aimed at a particular viewpoint, and at preventing people of like minds from assembling together.  In essence the statues are aimed at destroying the American gun culture.

Senator David Minn spearheaded a measure to ban gun shows at the Orange County Fairground in 2021. The bill passed and became California Penal Code 27575 . A later bill banned gun shows on all California state property in 2022, it became California Penal Code 27573.

B&L Productions, Inc. (doing business as Crossroads of the West) filed suit in federal court, contending the two statues violated their rights under both the First and Second Amendments.

On October 30, 2023, District Judge John W. Holcomb for the Central District of California granted a motion for preliminary injunction. Judge Holcomb found it likely the plaintiffs would prevail, and the courts would strike down the two California statutes. From B&L Productions v Newsom:

The California legislature recently enacted two statutes that effectively ban gun shows at the Orange County Fairgrounds and, more broadly, on state-owned property. Plaintiffs, a group of gun show proprietors and enthusiasts, sued the Governor of California and other state officials and agencies in an effort to invalidate those two state statutes.

Plaintiffs moved for a preliminary injunction. Plaintiffs argue that the statutes at issue infringe both their First Amendment freedom-of-speech rights in a public forum and their Second Amendment rights to keep and bear arms. After reviewing the parties’ extensive briefing and conducting a hearing on the motion, the Court concludes that Plaintiffs have established that they are likely to succeed on the merits of their constitutional claims and that they have satisfied the other requirements for injunctive relief. Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ motion is GRANTED. Defendants are preliminarily ENJOINED and RESTRAINED from enforcing the two state statues at issue.

California politicians have been attempting to shut down California gun shows for at least two decades.  During that period, the hostility of the Ninth Circuit judges has become infamous. During the same two decades, the Supreme Court of the United States has rendered several decisions to restore Second Amendment rights to their proper position as enumerated in the Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution. Those decisions include Heller (2008), McDonald (2010), Caetano (2016), and Bruen (2022). California is one of a few states stubbornly refusing to follow the Supreme Court directions on the Second Amendment.

Analysis:

It seems likely the State of California will appeal the order of preliminary injunction to the Ninth Circuit. If a three judge panel upholds the preliminary injunction, expect the State of California to appeal to an en banc panel of judges, where favorable rulings on the Second Amendment have gone to be killed.

©2023 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

 

OH: Man Shoots, Kills, Suspect Attempting Break-in

At around 10:15 p.m. Wednesday, a caller to 911 told dispatch that he had shot a male subject who was attempting to break in his house, according to police. When officers arrived, they located a man — later identified as Keeton — laying on the front porch of the home near the front door.

Police said the man was unresponsive with a gunshot wound to the upper left side of his chest.

 

More Here

IL: Disarm, During Struggle for Gun, Both Victim and Suspect were shot

A maintenance man was shot during an attempted robbery and fought back against the gunman, resulting in the suspect being shot with his own gun, in Waukegan Tuesday.

More Here

Speaker Mike Johnson Passes First Difficult Test on Second Amendment

 

Speaker of the House Mike Johnson

New Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, (R) has passed his first Second Amendment test. He immediately and forcefully stated a mass murder does not override the Constitution, and contrary to Democratic policy, emotion should not be used to enact laws which would never be acceptable in a quiet and reasoned debate. The statement was made on an interview with Sean Hannity on Fox. The quote starts at 41 seconds in on the Youtube video. Link to Interview with Speaker Mike Thompson with Hannity on Fox:

For those who prefer text, here is the quote, from Mediaite.com:

“The end of the day, the problem is the human heart,” Johnson replied. “It’s not guns, it’s not the weapons. At the end of the day, we have to protect the right of the citizens to protect themselves and that’s the Second Amendment. And that’s why our party stands so strongly for that.”

He added, “This is not the time to be talking about legislation. We’re in the middle of that crisis right now.”

Just after a mass murder is committed with a firearm, is when politicians are most vulnerable to manipulation by pressure from the old dominant media. At this point, the old dominant media and the Democratic administration are parts of the same leftist ideology. They immediately push the false narrative that the cause of mass murder is the Second Amendment and firearms ownership in the USA. House Speaker Johnson did not accept the false assumptions. He gently corrected them:

“The end of the day, the problem is the human heart,” Johnson replied. “It’s not guns, it’s not the weapons.

The Biden administration immediately struck back with a false representation of what speaker Johnson said. From politico.com:

In a statement, White House spokesman Andrew Bates said the administration “absolutely” rejected “the offensive accusation that gun crime is uniquely high in the United States because of Americans’ ‘hearts.’”

There are at least three lies in the White House statement.

Lie #1. Speaker Johnson talked about "gun crime".  He did not. In fact, he said it was not about weapons.

Lie #2. "gun crime" is uniquely high in the USA. It isn't. Many countries in the world have far higher rates of crime committed with firearms than the United States. Brazil has a homicide rate with guns which is over four times as high as the United States. Brazil has about 1/16th as many firearms per person as the USA.

Lie #3. Speaker Johnson did not single out "Americans' hearts. He spoke of "the human heart". This is an important philosophical difference between the left and conservatives. Conservatives believe there is a basic human nature. Leftist, generally, since Marx, do not.

Speaker Johnson stands in contrast to former Speaker Paul Ryan. Here is a statement made by former speaker Paul Ryan, a few days after the Las Vegas mass murder on October 1, 2017. Ryan's comments were made on October 7th. From the jsonline.com:

In the wake of the Las Vegas mass shooting, U.S. House Speaker Paul Ryan says he's open to a vote in Congress on what is known as a "bump stock," a device that can be attached to a semi-automatic rifle that allows it to mimic a fully automatic one.

The Janesville Republican made his remarks on MSNBC's Hugh Hewitt talk show, which aired Saturday.

"I didn't even know what they were until this week, and I'm an avid sportsman," Ryan said of bump stocks. He added: "Fully automatic weapons have been banned for a long time. Apparently, this allows you to take a semiautomatic, turn it into a fully automatic, so clearly that's something we need to look into."

Speaker Paul Ryan killed the Hearing Protection Act on October 3rd, two days after the mass murder in Las Vegas. Earlier, it appeared the act had an excellent chance of passage. Ryan had delayed the act when the dedicated leftist had attacked Congressional Republicans and almost killed representative Scalise. It appeared to this correspondent as an excuse at the time.

Time will tell how effective Mike Johnson will be as House Speaker.

©2023 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

TN: Mexican National Shot during Home Invasion

Coffee County Sheriff’s deputies responded to a home invasion in the Beechgrove area around 4 Monday morning. One subject, 24 year-old Carlos Daniel Antonio Rivera, was shot by the homeowner on Bankshire Road. The subject is in a Nashville hospital with gunshot wounds to the chest.

More Here

NM: Three Gun Turn-in Events on November 4 , Albuquerque, Las Cruces, Espanola

Long guns turned in by individual at Dallas event October 2023

 

New Mexico state police have announced a trio of gun turn in events, know by the Orwellian propaganda term "buy back" to be held on Saturday, November 4, 2023, from 8:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. in Albuquerque, Las Cruces, and Espanola. Police state gift cards will be given out for any firearm, working or not, with a very generous amount of $300 for rifles, shotguns, or "assault weapons", and a more pedestrian amount of $200 for handguns.  This correspondent has contacted the NM State Police, but has not been given information about how much money is allocated for these events at the time of this writing.

Events managed by police for individuals to turn in guns for gift cards have become popular again, as 1.6 trillion dollars pushed into the political environment has to be spent in some way. From New Mexico state police press release on Facebook:

New Mexico State Police Coordinate Gun Buy Back to Promote Gun Safety and Reduce Gun Violence

 

Albuquerque, Las Cruces, and Espanola NM –

On Saturday, November 4, 2023, the New Mexico State Police are coordinating a Gun Buyback Event in Albuquerque, Las Cruces, and Espanola. 

 

The events will take place on November 4, 2023, from 8:00 a.m. through 2:00 p.m. at the following locations:

 

Albuquerque, at Expo New Mexico at 300 San Pedro Gate 6 (south of Lomas), Las Cruces, at the Sportsman’s Warehouse at 2230 N. Telshor Blvd. Espanola, at Robert “Gordy” Vigil Regional Sportsplex at 2000 Industrial Park Rd. 

 

People may anonymously hand in unwanted guns and firearms and receive Visa and/or American Express gift cards in return. No questions will be asked about who owns the guns or where they came from. Buybacks are intended
to prevent unwanted or unneeded weapons from causing harm or being used
to commit acts of violence.

 

Buyback Event details: $200.00 Visa and/or American Express gift card for handguns, $300.00 Visa and/or American Express gift card for rifles, shotguns, and assault weapons. Firearms may be functional or non-functional.

 

“This is a proactive measure to prevent tragedies involving guns. We want to help remove unwanted guns from our communities and reduce the risk of deadly accidents, homicides, and suicides” said Troy Weisler, Chief of the New Mexico State Police.

If this correspondent were a few hundred miles closer to this event, a number of older and inexpensive long guns would be made ready to be turned in. Magazines, scopes, and other accessories would be removed. Many long guns can be purchased for less than $200, and older long guns with problems may be worth less than $200. In the last few years, this correspondent has purchased a number of firearms for about $100.  Unfortunately, this is a gamble. The gamble being: will the gift cards run out before a person is able to turn in the guns for the money? In Dallas, on October 23, the gift cards ran out in an hour, and only about the first 10 vehicles in line received any gift cards. The first vehicle turning in shotguns had about 100 of them.  In Dallas, the government was offering $200 per long gun. In New Mexico, the government will be offering $300. If the government runs out of gift cards, as is likely, there will be many people in line, who were determined to get rid of some guns.

This is the when private buyers make great deals. In Dallas, a mint Colt SP-1 (pre-ban AR15) was purchased for $400. It may be worth $2,000 to $3,000 on the collector market.

The New Mexico Democratic Party government of Lujan Grisham is not known for its common sense or fiscal responsibility.  $300 is more than many long guns retail for new:

 

Image from Walmart 20 September shows 5 long guns under $200 and slots for two more.

If the gift cards last long enough, they will empty the gun stores of new and old guns with prices less than $200. If the gift cards are unlimited, this program could bankrupt the State of New Mexico!

 ©2023 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

AZ: Suspect Shot during Attempted Break-in

Officers went to a neighborhood on Campus Drive, near Southern Avenue and Rural Road after a 911 call around 5:40 a.m. When officers arrived they found a man shot inside a home he doesn’t live in, police say. He was taken to a hospital with non-life threatening injuries. There are no reports of anyone else hurt.

 

More Here

Judge Benitez Schools Historian Saul Cornell on playing fast and loose with the Facts

Federal District Judge Roger Benitez

Progressive historians have used their position to justify unfettered governmen power for decades. Professor Saul Cornell has long taken the position the Second Amendment does not mean what it says. As an example of his rhetoric, he claims government policies encouraging gun ownership as proof of the legitimacy of government authority to ban guns. Laws and regulations encouraging people to exercise their right to arms are not a persuasive argument to show they had the authority to ban exercise of the right.  From Professor Saul Cornell:

Without government direction there would have been no body of Minutemen
to muster on the town greens at Lexington and Concord. If the Founders
had imbibed the strong gun rights ideology that drives today’s gun
debate we would all be drinking tea and singing, “God save our gracious
Queen.”

Professor Cornell conveniently ignores the fact the (British) Governments attempt at disarming American colonists (including the militias) at Lexington and Concord directly led to the Revolutionary war and the forming of the United States.

Professor Cornell submitted his thoughts in an amicus brief to Judge Benitez in the Miller v Becerra case. Judge Benitez did his job and objectively considered what Professor Cornell wrote. He found many factual errors. Judge Benitez found professor Cornell claimed, at the time of the Fourteenth Amendment, Americans were:

"apprehensive about 'the proliferation of especially dangerous weapons and the societal harms they caused'. In support he cites McDonald. McDonald says no such thing"

Benitez finds professor Cornell claims regulating firearms and gunpower was at the very core of police power. Cornell cites three cases. The problem is they are about storing gunpowder safely as a fire hazard, and say almost nothing about firearms. Professor Cornell cites a case about the potential to regulate a militia, and discounts a case striking down a concealed carry law. Cornell routinely ignores cases which extol the American right to keep and bear arms. Judge Benitez closes his case on professor Cornell with this statement:

The antebellum court decisions upon which professor Cornell rests, do not say what he contends they say. Perhaps he is to be forgiven because he is a historian rather than a member of the bar, but his opinions are not persuasive and are entitled to no weight.

Judge Benitez comments on Professor Cornell's arguments can be found in the Miller v Becerra opinion, pages 58 - 62.

Professor Cornell has often been cited by those who desire unfettered government power, and wish for a disarmed American population. In Miller v Becerra, where professor Cornell has a chance to have a major impact, we see his arguments are based on mischaracterizations, bordering on, if not direct, falsehoods. They remind this correspondent of the Michael Bellesiles case. If one agree with the Orwellian concept that political policy should drive the way history is viewed, a person could sympathize with professor Cornell. He has so little, verging on nothing, to work with to justify his preferred policies. It is easy to see why Judge Benitez reaches this conclusion:

his opinions are not persuasive and are entitled to no weight.

Second Amendment activists may wish to remember this evisceration of Professor Cornell's arguments. These are the best arguments Professor Cornell has, within the bounds of the Consitution.

 ©2023 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

GA: Gunfight, Construction Worker Shoot Suspect who Fired at Him

Preliminary Information: On 10/28/23, around 12:25pm, officers responded to an aggravated assault at the location of 1218 Epworth St. Upon arrival, officers located a juvenile male with a gunshot wound to the leg. He was alert, conscious and breathing and transported to the hospital in stable condition. (in police custody) Preliminary investigation indicates the victim, who is an adult male, was working construction on a house when he observed the juvenile male suspect breaking into his utility vehicle. The juvenile suspect brandished a firearm and fired at the victim. The victim, who was also armed, returned fire, striking the juvenile suspect in the leg. Officers on scene placed the juvenile in custody with charges pending. The investigation continues. 

 

More Here

Dissent in Duncan v. Bonta Reveals Insider Shenanigans at the Ninth Circuit on Second Amendment

 

 

 

On September 28, an en banc panel from from the Ninth Circuit grabbed control of the Duncan v. Bonta Magazine ban case, in a stunning departure from the usual order of the court. It may, or may not have violated the rules of the court. Several of the judges on the panel were not happy. Four judges of the eleven judge panel dissented. Of particular interest was the dissent of Judge VanDyke, J. The honorable Judge VanDyke revealed a history of internal shenanigans when the en banc panel first took the case. Judge VanDyke aired some of the Ninth Circuit's dirty laundry. The strong, ideological opposition to the Second Amendment has been clear in the Ninth Circuit from the beginning.

The first part of the dissent explains how the abortion decision in Row v Wade and its followup decisions distorted court procedure and case law. It is used as an example of how poisonous special treatment of a political cause is. The history of the en banc panel by Judge VanDyke shows how opposition to the Second Amendment took priority over everything else. Below is most of the VanDyke dissent concerning the Second amendment.

Cases involving the Second Amendment in our circuit have unfortunately suffered from a like phenomenon. And just as we should no longer distort our rules in abortion cases, we should no longer apply “different rules to different constitutional rights.” Whole Woman’s Health, 136 S. Ct. at 2321 (Thomas, J., dissenting). We should not give Second Amendment cases “special” treatment.

But the current irregularities highlighted by Judge Bumatay’s dissent are not the only way this case continues to demonstrate our court’s enduring bellicosity toward the Second Amendment. The irregularities in this case run much deeper— indeed, all the way back to when this case was first called en banc. This en banc panel was born in illegitimacy, and this case should never have been taken en banc in the first place. After the three-judge panel first issued its opinion in August 2020, one judge on our court requested Rule 5.4(b) notice in three cases (including this one) but then inadvertently missed the deadlines to timely call the cases en banc under our clear rules. That could happen to any judge. But rather than simply accepting the result dictated by our rules, or even deciding as an entire court to waive our rules, we went in a different direction. First, the decision was made by someone—not by the rules, or even the entire court—to allow the respective panels to waive the deadlines on behalf of the entire court. Then, the campaign started: earnest conversations were had, hearts were poured out, tears were shed, and pressure was applied to the panels with mace-like collegiality. And in the end, a discrete collection of judges—again, not the entire court—struck a “compromise,” circumvented our own rules, and allowed the en banc call to move forward. But only in this one case. The agreement was made to call this case but drop the en banc calls in two other cases—including a death penalty case. Priorities.

A lot about this is deeply troubling. First and foremost, we have rules for a reason. We operate under them every day. They should apply equally and consistently, unless and until we change those rules in the normal course. There is no exception for “cases that some of the judges on our court really, really care about.” That would be capricious and erode external and internal confidence in our court. If we lack the temerity to codify a “Second Amendment exception” in our en banc rules, we should have refrained from employing it behind the double veil of “internal court matters” in which only some members of the court participated.

Second, because we have clear, settled, court-wide rules, a discrete group of panel and off-panel judges interested in en banc rehearing shouldn’t have been permitted to circumvent those rules on their own. We have a process for suspending the rules, upon a vote of the entire court.See 9th Cir. General Order 12.11. But no judge tendered a Rule 12.11 request. Instead, this was handled off the books by a handful of judges. Which makes it even worse. This off-books approach allowed the would-be en banc advocates to pressure the panels to be “collegial,” and simultaneously concealed these conversations from the rest of the court. It also delimited the scope of the question to whether we would “bend the rules” and allow some exceptions in three specific cases, which prevented the entire court from considering the weightier question of whether, as an institution, we should be suspending our settled rules for “particularly important cases.” Such agreement—however procured—does not somehow confer legitimacy.

In sum, not only is our court treating this case “special” now, but the process that brought this case en banc in the first place was illegitimate from the start. This demonstrates and perpetuates this court’s anti-Second Amendment posture, rewards the weaponization of (one-sided) collegiality, and damages the internal and external integrity of the court. How are we to uphold the rule of law, and reassure the public we are doing so, when we disregard our own rules and make questionable decisions like this behind closed doors?

The story of the Second Amendment in this circuit has been a consistent tale of our court versus the Supreme Court and the Constitution. That tale continues today, and will continue as long as a number of my colleagues retain the discretion to twist the law and procedure to reach their desired conclusion. As uncomfortable as it is to keep pointing that out, it is important the public keeps being reminded of that fact. 

This correspondent recalls, at the time, thinking the time limit for an en banc hearing had run out. Then the en banc panel happened anyway. Without the inside knowledge of the rules and procedure revealed by Judge VanDyke, the supposition was the Ninth could do what they liked, and they liked to disrespect the Second Amendment. Judge VanDyke reveals a deeper philosophical cancer. The desire of a small group of judges to control the destiny of the nation overrode all precedent and agreed on rules. It is a typical Progressive cancer.  Progressives view the Constitution and the rule of law as obstacles to be "worked around" to get what they want. This is a cancer on the Republic. It collapses power to a oligarchy of the judges. Progressives viewed any limitation on government power as an abomination.

©2023 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

 

 

MO: Armed Victim Stops Attempted Carjack, 1 Suspect shot, Killed

According to an earlier news release, Bibby and Jewett allegedly tried to steal a car at about 12:29 a.m. from the parking lot of HotShots Bar and Grill in the 1200 block of Laclede Station Road. When officers arrived at the scene, they discovered Bibby dead from an apparent gunshot wound.

The victim of the carjacking was located at the scene and in possession of his firearm. He told officers two men wearing ski masks confronted him near his vehicle, and fearing for his safety, he shot one of the suspects.

Jewett fled on foot and was arrested shortly after near Affton, according to the release.

More Here

Success of Homemade Guns at "Buyback" Propaganda Events

 

 
Image from Rock Island Auction: Two of five pump shotguns never had serial numbers

 

Second Amendment activists have scored a victory in the battle to have reality influence the debate over gun culture in the United States.

In the El Paso gun turn-in event in 2023, no "ghost guns" will be accepted.

 

For years, those who want a disarmed population have attempted to demonize homemade firearms as "ghost guns". They have claimed they are an existential threat to the people of the USA and the world. The claim is lack of a serial number somehow makes a gun more dangerous. Serial numbers are easy to remove. Homemade guns have existed since before the Republic was founded. Serial numbers were not required on firearms until 1968. The claim a few more guns which are not "traceable" is somehow a problem, is not credible.

Most guns in the USA are not traceable, whether they have serial numbers or not. The credible reason to require serial numbers on all guns is to enable gun registration, which enables gun confiscation.

If "ghost guns" were a serious threat, "ghost guns" would be a high priority to be accepted at gun turn in "buyback" events. El Paso will not accept "ghost guns" because "ghost guns" at these events show the futility of gun control.  Accepting "ghost guns" quickly transfers the money from the event organizers to Second Amendment activists. The publicity of the "ghost guns" at gun "buybacks" destroys the propaganda effect of the event.

On July 30, 2022, a Second Amendment activist turned in at least 62 3D printed firearms in Houston, Texas. The event organizers paid out thousands of dollars. The publicity was priceless.

On August 22, 2022, a Second Amendment activist executed a well thought out bit of activism in Utica, New York. The far left Attorney General, Letitia James', office paid out over $21,000 dollars for 110 3D printed "ghost guns". From the activist, nom de guerre "Kem":

“I’m sure handing over $21,000 in gift cards to some punk kid after getting a bunch of plastic junk was a rousing success,” laughed Kem. “Gun buybacks are a fantastic way of showing, number one, that your policies don’t work, and, number 2, you’re creating perverse demand. You’re causing people to show up to these events, and, they don’t actually reduce crime whatsoever.”

The AG said 177 "ghost guns were paid for. There must have been more than one "Kem".  Kem and company did their successful activism on August 22, 2022, just two months after the pivotal Supreme Court Second Amendment decision in Bruen.  Before Houston, before Utica, there were several precursors who turned in slam fire shotguns at "buyback" events. These extremely cheap, effective homemade firearms showed the entire concept of "buyback" events as a farce.

The organizers of the El Paso event had to respond. They refused to accept "ghost guns" at their gun turn in.  Exactly what the pronouncement means is unclear. At a recent event in Dallas, police officers put down "no serial number" for guns made before 1968. This correspondent asked if guns made before 1968, without serial numbers, were commonly encountered. The answer was a clear "yes". Guns made before 1968 are a common occurrence. There are millions of guns, legally in circulation, which never had serial numbers, because they were not required.

The pre-1968 guns are no more or less dangerous than similar guns with serial numbers. The presence or lack of a serial number does not make a gun more or less dangerous.

Second Amendment activists turned the tables on the silly fraud of gun "buyback" events. Paying people more than guns are worth is a propaganda effort. Paying people less than guns are worth is a cheat. The propaganda effect is neutralized and reversed by activists such as Kem and others. The organizers of the El Paso event have been force to recognize the reality.

Effective guns can be easily and cheaply made at home. Serial numbers do not prevent criminals from obtaining firearms.

Private buyers at these events have a similar effect to those turning in homemade guns. The events are street theater designed to convey the message "Guns are bad. Turn them in." Private buyers send a different message: "Guns are valuable. We pay cash."

The recent flurry of gun "buyback" events is fueled by cheap government money, part of the trillions of dollars created by the Biden administration.  By creating monetary inflation, the money is driving up the cost of food, fuel, and housing. A few Second Amendment activists are obtaining some good guns at low cost as a side effect.

©2023 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

FL: Attempted Home Invasion, 1 Killed, 1 Wounded, Third Arrested

PASCO COUNTY, Fla. — The Pasco County Sheriff's Office said one person is dead and another injured after a shooting Friday afternoon in Port Richey.

According to the sheriff's office, three suspects were attempting to break into a home in the Hickory Hill Dr. area just after 2 p.m. when a person inside the home shot at the suspects trying to break in.

More Here

Slaughterhouse Silencers

A close friend told this correspondent of a high school field trip about 1975. The trip was to a slaughterhouse in Sioux Falls, South Dakota.  There he encountered a Maxim Silencer attached to .22 single shot pistol. The Maxim and pistol were displayed on the wall. The display said the silenced pistol had been used to slaughter over two million cattle before it was retired, presumably when a captive bolt system was substituted.

Research revealed Sioux Falls was close to where my friend went to school. It has a huge slaughterhouse industry, started in 1909. The number of animals processed there each year numbers in the millions. By 1949, 800 cattle were being processed there each day. According to a source online, it takes about two minutes to move an animal on the processing line. If we limit a day to eight hours, there would be 240 cattle processed in a day. If we limit the days used in a year to 200, there would be 48,000 cattle processed in a year, and it would take 42 years to process 2 million cattle. The plant was started in 1909, the same year the Maxim Silencer became available. There was time enough for the Maxim system to be used for 2 million head.

As a practical matter, the plant operates 24/7 in shifts, 365 days a year, so there was enough time to process millions of head on several different lines, including time used for regular maintenance.

Another friend, Don Cowling, was involved in research at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, which included retrieving cattle organs and blood from freshly killed animals. He reported the use of a .22 single shot in the slaughterhouse in the 1960's. That .22 did not have a Maxim Silencer.

In 2002, Al Paulson, in Smallarmsreview.com, reported the use of a single shot .22 pistol with a Maxim Silencer in a Texas slaughter house from 1909 to 2000, in 2002. He calculated the number of cattle processed with the combination to be over 700,000 during the 91 year period. He wrote the combination was in excellent condition, although the finish had worn off the silencer. He tested the silencer, a Maxim Model 1909. It reduced the sound signature by 33 decibels, a good performance for a modern model. The Texas Maxim had an appropriate IRS number, showing it had been registered as required by the National Firearms Act.

In a 2011 Small Arms Review followup article, Mark White revealed more information about the Texas slaughterhouse Maxim and pistol. The pistol appears to have been a converted Quackenbush Bicycle rifle, threaded for the Maxim.

 

Paulson said the barrel length was just under seven inches. The Maxim models were sealed units. Flushing them with hot soapy water, draining, drying, then oiling them was the recommended maintenance. From the article:

Highly corrosive materials in the priming and propellant gas required that a Maxim silencer be removed and boiled in soapy water after each and every use. It then had to be drained, dried and re-oiled to prevent destructive corrosion. Most of the early Maxim silencers have been ruined over the years because they lacked this high level of care.

Hot water and soap are not difficult to find in a slaughterhouse. After 1934, a Maxim setup became 20 times as valuable. To obtain one after 1934 required a $200 tax stamp. Many items which existed before the National Firearms Act was passed were grandfathered in during a 60 day grace period, without paying the tax.  Maxim stopped manufacture of the 1909 model by 1930, if not earlier, so a replacement might have been difficult to find. Maxim silencers kept animals coming up the line from becoming agitated. They protected workers hearing. They were an effective industrial tool for decades of American history.

My friend thought the Maxim in Souix Falls was mounted on a Stevens single shot, with a break open action, as shown in the Maxim ad.

Both Quackenbush and Stevens designs are simple and rugged. They do not spew brass in an industrial area. Two minutes is plenty of time to load a single shot pistol. The designers of the firearms and Hiram Percy Maxim, designer of the silencer, (son of the designer of the Maxim machine gun), built robust machines which performed well for hundreds of thousands to millions of operations over several decades.

©2023 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

 

 

TX: Disarm, 18-Year-Old with 4 Felony Warrants Shot in Dispute over Parking

HPD patrol officers responded to a shooting call outside a convenience store at the above address and were advised the victim and a male suspect, later identified as Peoples, got into an altercation while parking their vehicles.  Peoples pulled out a gun and struck the victim in the face with it.  During an ensuing struggle, the victim managed to fire the weapon and strike Peoples more than once.  Peoples went to a hospital with gunshot wounds prior to officers’ arrival.

Officers learned Peoples was in stable condition at the hospital.  He was found to have four open felony warrants.  The Harris County District Attorney’s Office was consulted and Peoples was charged for his role in the shooting incident.  Peoples was treated for his wounds and transported to the Harris County Jail.

 

More Here

Dallas Gun Turn-in Event "buyback" Resounding Success for Gun Sellers, Private Buyers

 

In 2023, Dallas Councilman Jesse Moreno decided to use $20,000 dollars of discretionary funds to hold a gun turn-in event at a Dallas park. The event evolved over time. It was held at  Samuell Grand in The Cove parking lot. The event became a rousing success for those selling guns and for private purchasers. It was a frustrating experience for most of those attempting to turn in guns for gift cards.

According to a police source at the event, people started getting in line very early. One pickup, with about a hundred shotguns to turn in, was in line by 7 a.m. The event was scheduled to start at 9 a.m. This correspondent arrived at 8:23 a.m. There was a line of about 20 vehicles extending East down Samuel Blvd, with the near lane separated from traffic by traffic cones. To their credit, the event organizers did not start accepting turn-ins until about 9:01 a.m.  The turn-in of a long gun recieved gift cards worth $200. The pickup with the shotguns was the second vehicle in line. The first vehicle seemed to be associated with the event in some way, and did not appear to have a firearm to turn in.

 

 

The first firearms to be turned in were nice, Turkish made over-under shotguns. Many of these shotguns were turned in at the event. The number is uncertain, estimated at 50. They were a mix of gauges, with some missing chokes. They seemed to be new.

The police were unwilling to have all the event money go to the first person in line with 100 shotguns. They set the pick-up truck with the shotguns aside as they were processing the firearms, and started to process others in line as well. This violated the "first come first served" rule of the event, but was accepted.

Vehicle number six or seven held 18 long guns, most in poor shape, with a couple of new, inexpensive .22 rifles.  One of the guns being turned in was a British Snider .577, with Arabic symbols stamped on the barrel. It was missing the ramrod. The owner knew ammunition was difficult to find, so he turned it in for $200, along with the 17 other long guns. This correspondent was tempted to offer him $200 for this bit of history, but did not. It was a well worn bit of history.

Most vehicles had more than one firearm. The estimate was they ran out of gift cards before 10 vehicles were processed, at about 115 firearms.  There were some handguns turned in for $100 each. The cards ran out about 9 a.m. At that point there were about 30 vehicles in line.

People who were ideologically motivated continued to turn in guns after it was announced the gift cards had run out. The total number of guns turned in was not announced. This correspondent estimated the total at 125 to 150 total guns turned in. Most were turned in because they could not be sold. A source at the event indicated the nice shotguns could not be sold because of a defect, physical or legal. Other guns, such as the beat up Snider, were not in high demand. Some nice firearms were turned in for ideological reasons. This Browing Hi-Power (without magazine) was turned in. The police officer told the person turning it in it was worth much more than the $100 offered. She did not care.

 

Private buyers were working the line well before the event started. There were about a dozen before the event closed. One successful private buyer ended up with eight guns before the cards ran out, and another four guns after the gift cards were exhausted.

Here is one of he firearms he obtained:

It is a Colt, pre-ban collector grade AR15. No magazine was included.

Based on the number of private buyers and their success, about 70-100 firearms were purchased as people waited, after the cards ran out, and when people showed up late for the turn in. Highlights of the private purchases are expected to be published in  a later article.

©2023 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

CA: Hammer to a Gun Fight in a Gun Store

A man who reportedly tried to rob a Livermore gun store while armed with a hammer was shot and killed by the shop's owner Sunday afternoon.

At about 2:30 p.m., Livermore police officers were called to East Bay Firearms on First Street, where they found a 28-year-old Redwood City man who had been shot at least one time and soon died at the scene.

More Here

TX: Cheap Gun Opportunity El Paso 28 October 2023

El Paso Texas has organized a cheap gun opportunity for Saturday, October 28, 2023. The event is expected to be memorable because of the amount of money available and the short time allotted to expend the funds. From KVIA.com:

County commissioners unanimously voted to use $300,000 of American Rescue Plan Act funds to establish the new program.

With the funds they will purchase gift cards to give to those who voluntarily turn in guns at their events.

The flurry of gun turn-in events (called buybacks, in Orwellian word choice), is fueled by the 1.3 trillion dollar boondoggle of the "American Rescue Plan". The destructive politics which are causing food, fuel and housing prices to skyrocket is being used for these propaganda projects.  The "American Rescue Plan" is a direct cause of inflation.

Of the $300,000.00 allotted, $120,000 or 40%, will be used for advertising of the event, and staff, according to KVIA.  Local media and those who will be paid overtime for the event will benefit. This is the first of possibly three or four events planned for El Paso. From the experience of this correspondent in Phoenix, and the recent history of a similar project in Houston, there will be significant opportunities for private buyers to purchase excellent firearms at low prices. The event will be held at Ascarte Park in El Paso. Ironically, the park is right on the border with Mexico. There are significant barriers at this border area. TX-375 loop, a chunk of President Trump's border barrier, and the Rio Grande river separate the park from Mexico. Trump's border barrier transitions to a much less formidable fence at the West end of the park. Map of Ascarte Park in El Paso

In Houston, it is reported some police attempted to hassle private buyers without effect. Private purchasers are perfectly legal in Texas and most states. Many private purchasers declare they have concealed carry permits, to show they are have been vetted. There are 25 states which allow people with permits to purchase firearms without going through the National Instant background Check System (NICS) to various degrees. In the October 21 event in Dallas, the police were professional and co-operative. 

El Paso has not had an event such as this for over 20 years. There will be an accumulation of people who have inherited firearms, who know little or nothing about them, and who want to get rid of them with a minimum of hassle. This is the genesis for excellent deals for private purchasers. The park is public property. It is difficult to see how private purchasers could be legally excluded from a public event. As these events are organized to have people bring the firearms in a vehicle, most successful private buyers walk the line of vehicles, and ask people if they are interested in accepting cash for guns.

In this correspondent's experience, there are three groups of people who turn in firearms at these events: inheritance,  economic, and ideological. There is always some overlap in these groups. Those who have inherited the firearms see little value in them, and simply want to eliminate the hassle of owning a firearm they do not wish to deal with. These are the best prospects. The economic group has an idea of what the firearms are worth, and expect to obtain more than market value. The ideological group wants the firearms they are bringing to be destroyed. Ideologicals are impervious to offers to purchase. At an event in Tucson, Arizona, a person insisted on having an original Colt Python destroyed, in spite of being offered thousands of dollars for the revolver.

If you intend to be a private purchaser, make a sign so people can easily see your intent. You may wish to have a small cart to help contain and carry your purchases. These events do not pay for ammunition. Consider asking about ammunition. You may obtain ammunition for very reasonable prices. 

©2023 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

Great background on the upsurge in gun "buyback" programs.

NC: Man Shot, Killed, while Breaking into Home

According to police, Contestable, age 34, was attempting to break into the home along Abercrombie Road when he was confronted by one of the homeowners, who is a legal gun owner. The homeowner gave repeated verbal warnings before shooting Contestable who had broken several panes of glass on the door while attempting to gain entry.

Based on the results of the preliminary investigation, no charges have been filed against the homeowner.

 

More Here

PA: Domestic Defense, Gunfight among Relatives

Investigators say an argument ensued between David Feliciano, 56, and a 25-year-old man, over family matters.

Troopers say when the argument escalated Feliciano who was holding a revolver, fired at least one round into the air, then pointed the gun at the man, who then retrieved his firearm, which he legally owns, and fired one round striking Feliciano in the arm.

More Here

OH: Suspect Shot, Killed inside Smoke Shop

DELHI TOWNSHIP, Ohio — A 16-year-old has been identified as the person shot and killed Friday at a smoke shop in Delhi Township, the Hamilton County Coroner's Office said.

Delhi Police Chief Jeff Braun said police were called to the VIP Smoke Shop on Delhi Road at around 1 a.m.

"While responding, an update was provided that an employee of the business shot an intruder who broke into the business," says a press release from Delhi police. 

 

More Here

IL: Domestic Defense? Woman Shoots Man

CHICAGO - A woman fatally shot a knife-wielding man early Sunday in Morgan Park on the Far South Side.

The shooting happened around 12:45 a.m. when a 41-year-old man who the woman knew approached her with a knife inside her home in the 11500 block of South Vincennes Avenue, Chicago police said.

The woman then pulled out a gun and shot the man four times in his torso, police said.

More Here

VA: Couple Shoot Teen Intruder

PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY, Va. -- A homeowner shot a teenager who broke into his Prince George home Friday afternoon, police say.

Just before 4 p.m. Friday, police responded to a home for a burglary call on Songbird Lane in Prince George County.

A preliminary investigation revealed that the homeowners, a husband and wife, discovered someone inside their home, which led to the shooting of the teenager. 

 

More Here

MS: Domestic Defense, Father Shoots Son who Assaulted Father and Mother

The sheriff’s department said, according to reports, 42-year-old Jeffery Boler was shot once in the shoulder by his father during a domestic assault.

During JCSD Sgt. J.D. Carter’s investigation, it was learned that Boler was believed to be intoxicated and assaulted his father, Douglas, 72, and his mother, Amanda, 70.

More Here

WA: Homeowner uses Gunfire to Drive off Three Invaders who Impersonated Police

Security video shows three masked men carrying guns shout "Seattle Police" while each trying to kick in the door.

The homeowner grabbed a gun and fired multiple shots through the door at the intruders.

 

More Here

SC: Gunfight, Vicim Killed, Aggressor Killed by Guard

Investigators said two men were arguing outside of the club when one of them pulled out a gun and shot the other.

A security guard working at the club then shot and killed the other man, police spokesman Harve Jacobs said.

One of the men was pronounced dead at the scene. The other was taken to an area hospital where he was pronounced dead.

More Here