Author Archives: Arizona Rifleman

Arizona news: HB 2455 gets signed!

Posted on by
Reply

Excellent news! HB 2455 passed!

HB 2455 clarifies that firearms surrendered voluntarily to police (for example, as a result of a “gun buy back” program) cannot be destroyed and must (assuming they’re legal and not stolen) be sold to licensed dealers who can in turn sell them to private citizens who pass a NICS check.

Previously, the police were only prohibited from destroying guns that were “recovered, lost, or abandoned” and there was some confusion as to whether or not guns that were voluntarily surrendered to police were “abandoned” — this bill clarifies the issue by adding “surrendered” and “or otherwise received”.

Many thanks to the AzCDL, the state legislature, and the governor for getting this done!

On Donations

Posted on by
Reply

I’ve been a Life Member of the NRA for many years now and while I occasionally disagree with certain things they do1, overall I’ve been quite happy with them.

In addition to subscribing to several pro-gun blogs, twitter feeds, and mailing lists, I also subscribe to several belonging to anti-gun-rights groups just so I can keep up to date on what’s going on. In particular, I’m interested in the so-called “moderate groups” like Mark Kelly and Gabby Gifford’s Americans for Responsible Solutions which, despite their mild name and claims to being moderate, continue to promote the same tried-and-ineffective policies like bans on popular guns, limiting magazine capacity, banning private transfers, and other policies that seem to come directly from groups like the VPC and the Brady Campaign.

In the days leading up to the big Senate vote, I received several letters from ARS asking for donations and support for their cause. Instead, I donated twice the amount ARS requested to the NRA-ILA.

Budget permitting, I will continue to do so for the foreseeable future and recommend that you do too.

  1. I’m not a big fan of Wayne LaPierre and think that his constant demonizing of “liberals”, while occasionally well-deserved, is driving otherwise-sympathetic people away from the NRA and gun rights in general when our side needs them the most. [↩]

Gun Control Fails

Posted on by
Reply

Thanks to the efforts of Sebastian and Bitter over at SNBQ to liveblog the recent Senate vote and by streaming C-SPAN live video, I was able to watch the various restrictive gun control measures fail.

I was worried about the Toomey-Manchin amendment, as it would likely have been the basis for even more restrictive gun control, and given the momentum to the anti-gun-rights groups. Fortunately, all the measures failed, with Feinstein’s AWB and the magazine limit bill both failing to achieve even a simple majority.

Well done, everyone. The side of liberty won this time, but we must remain vigilant.

Sorry for the inactivity.

Posted on by
1

Shock! Alarm! There’s actually a new post!

As you might have noticed, I’ve been inactive for the last year or so — things have been extremely hectic in the lab and I’m in the “crunch time” for my dissertation. More soon.

For those who don’t follow it already, I strong recommend reading Shall Not Be Questioned at http://www.pagunblog.com/ — Sebastian and Bitter keep up to date with pretty much all gun-related news and information.

EU committee on piracy at sea finds that putting armed guards on ships reduces piracy

Posted on by
Reply

The committee admits it has “changed” its view on the use of armed guards since its last report on the issue, in 2010, finding that “no ship with an armed guard has been pirated and the use of guards has not escalated violence”.

via BBC News – EU anti-piracy fight with warships ‘must go on’.

That’s really no surprise: pirates are in it for quick money. If guards on a ship fire a couple warning shots at their tiny little boat it indicates that they’re on guard for pirates and it seems likely that the pirates would say “screw this” and hightail it out of there.

It’s also good to see the Europeans recommending that they continue to help police that area of the world: stopping piracy is everyone’s business.

I wonder…

Posted on by
Reply

…if anyone at the Mars Curiosity mission control named the rock they recently lasered “Alderaan”?

If I were them, I totally would. I’d also say “Commence primary ignition!” if I were the guy sending the “go” command, or “You may fire when ready!” in Tarkin’s tone if I were one of the directors.

Hey, if you can’t have fun shooting lasers at rocks on another planet, what can you do?

Half-Assed Media Speculation About the Batman Shooter – Hit & Run: Reason.com

Posted on by
Reply

I don’t normally quote Reason, but they do mention something that I find really irritating:

Undeterred by how wrong they got the Columbine shootings 13 years ago, or how disgustingly politicized they turned Jared Loughner’s 2011 rampage, the humans who work for and talk with journalistic outlets are again rushing to speculative judgment about Jim Holmes, the suspected Batman murderer in Aurora, Colorado.

via Half-Assed Media Speculation About the Batman Shooter – Hit & Run : Reason.com.

It turns out that there’s actually a precept of the American Psychological Association known as the Goldwater rule that states that it is unethical “for a psychiatrist to offer a professional opinion unless he or she has conducted an examination and has been granted proper authorization for such a statement1.”

Wild speculation doesn’t help and can be harmful. I’m inclined to let the appropriate experts make their informed conclusion rather than make guesses based on potentially-unreliable reports or claims in the media.

If only more people thought the same way…

  1. http://psychiatry.org/FileLibrary/Practice/EthicsDocuments/Ethics-Principles-2010.pdf, Page 9, Section 7, Principle #3 [↩]