conflation and association

And, predictably, the Commercial Appeal sinks to a new low, now attempting to conflate law-abiding, private handgun carry permit holders with the murderer in Alabama. Of course, given that the Commercial Appeal was already associating handgun carry permit holders with felons, sex offenders, and hate crime perpetrators, this should come as no great surprise to anyone paying attention.

Less than 24 hours after a man armed with two assault weapons, a shotgun and a handgun killed 11 in Alabama, a Tennessee legislative committee today approved a bill allowing handgun-carry licensees to carry loaded rifles and shotguns in their vehicles.

And, what, exactly, does the actions of a murderer in another state have to do with restoring certain rights to law-abiding citizens? Not a damned thing. Granted, the event was undeniably tragic, and should never have taken place, but something tells me that if it were illegal to carry a loaded long gun in one’s car in Alabama, the crime still would have happened. This is nothing more than a paltry, pathetic attempt to use the emotional impact of the murders in Alabama (otherwise referred to as “dancing in the blood of the victims”) to try and continue abridging and restricting the rights of lawful citizens. Way to stay classy, Commercial Appeal.

Although handgun-carry permit holders are legally allowed to carry loaded handguns — on their persons and in their vehicles — Tennessee law currently prohibits the transport of loaded rifles and shotguns in vehicles regardless of whether the carrier has a carry permit or not.

The law also prohibits having loaded clips and magazines “in the immediate vicinity” of the rifle or shotgun.

At least one writer at the Commercial Appeal has finally caught on to the fact that Tennessee issues “Handgun Carry Permits”, not “Concealed Weapon Permits” or whatever else they were referring to them as in the past, and the fact that “clips” and “magazines” are two entirely different pieces of hardware. If only the whole staff of the Commercial Appeal would realize that their irrational, emotional bigotry towards firearms and firearm owners was equally wrong, we might actually start making progres…

State Rep. Henry Fincher, D-Cookeville, said law enforcement officers have sometimes confiscated the rifles and shotguns of people stopped in their vehicles for other reasons if authorities found them loaded or loaded magazines or clips were found in the same passenger compartments with the guns.

Well, at the time, that activity was against the law (and still will be, until this bill gets signed by the Governor), so I guess that kind of figures. I guess if I were to load up my magazines before heading to the range (which only makes sense – why would one waste range time loading magazines when you can just as easily do it at home?), I would actually be breaking the law myself, given that I drive a hatchback, and the “trunk” section of the car is basically the same as the “passenger compartment” section.
And this, ladies and gentlemen, is another example of the over 20,000 idiotic firearm-related laws that have been plaguing our country of late… at least the Tennessee legislature is trying its damnest to get rid of this one.

“This bill would allow a handgun permit holder to have a loaded long gun in the car. If they have gone through the training and been cleared by the state to have the permits, they ought to be able to carry loaded long guns in their cars just as they can handguns. I really think it’s more of a technical move” than a change in state policy, Fincher told reporters after the House Judiciary Committee approved his bill and sent it to the committee that schedules legislation for House floor votes.

Personally, I do not quite grok why they are only limiting the bill to handgun carry permit holders… after all, the training for that is pretty handgun-oriented, and it is not like any party would be using a long gun in their car for self-defense (of course, on the flip side, a handgun is technically what you use until you can get to your rifle). Pre-loading firearms when heading to the range or the hunt would save time for anyone, permit or not. Oh well. I guess I should just treat it as a baby step in the right direction, encourage it, and see if we cannot expand on it.

Authorities in Alabama said today that 28-year-old John Doe [The murderer's name has been changd in accordance with this site's desire for him to remain nameless. -ed.] was armed with two assault rifles — an SKS and a Bushmaster — using high-capacity magazines taped together, a shotgun and a .38-caliber handgun to kill 10 people in an hour-long shooting rampage in southeastern Alabama Tuesday afternoon before killing himself. Half of the victims were relatives but the other five were random shootings, including three who McLendon shot while driving down streets.

And, right about there, Richard Locker jumped the tracks.
First, there is no such thing as an “assault rifle” (or “assault weapon”) – the term is entirely fabricated, and can be used to describe any firearm that would scare, unnerve, or otherwise disturb people, or possibly shares aesthetics with firearms used by the military in the past or present. The guns in question are nothing more than semi-automatic rifles, and bear a striking mechanical resemblance to a large amount of hardware used by hunters today. Sure, they look all big and mean and imposing, but the basic premise is not significantly different from any other semi-automatic rifle.
Second, there is no such thing as a “high capacity magazine”, simply because there is no such thing as a “low capacity magazine”, nor such a thing as a “normal capacity magazine”. This is nothing more than an emotionally charged phrase (like “assault weapon”) that journalists and hoplophobes (but I repeat myself) use to try and sway the hearts of their readers. Magazines just have capacities, and those capacities are neither high nor low, they are just a number. I wonder if Mr. Locker knows that there are 100-round drums available for that Bushmaster he talked about, and how that might (or, more probably, might not) affect his views of a 30-rounder as a “high capacity magazine”.
Third, again, how is this relevant? This is an entirely different story than the news concerning certain bills making their way through the Tennessee Legislature, and should be handled in a separate article. Given the years since the last, useless “Assault Weapon Ban” expired, even if a new one were to be put in place banning the Bushmaster or SKS (which I do not think was covered under the last Ban) and also banning magazines over a certain numerical capacity, the murderer in Alabama still would have been able to procure them, and, like I said, I doubt a law barring people from transporting loaded long guns in their cars would have really stopped him. Considering that he was already disobeying laws and societal constructs (by, you know, murdering people), how would more laws help?

Although Doe had been through a police training program, he was not a police officer and authorities have not said whether he had a handgun-carry permit. The Alabama legislature is considering — as is Tennessee — closing public access to the identities of handgun-carry permit holders.

Again, how is this relevant? Would his being a police officer have prevented him from snapping and murdering 10 people? Probably not. Hell, it might have even given him sufficient training to increase the number of people he killed. Furthermore, how would him having or not having a permit matter? The laws are still the laws, and murdering people is still against them. Again with the conflating law-abiding citizens with murderers and other criminals. Again with the drawing parallels, no matter how illogical or tenuous they might be. Again with the lack of any journalistic integrity on the part of the staff of the Commercial Appeal.
No big surprise there, I guess.

Fincher said he had not heard of the Alabama shootings before today’s committee meeting but said that if handgun-carry permit holders had been nearby with their guns, the shooter would likely have been killed before his death toll reached 10.

I congratulate Representative Fincher on his enthusiasm for handgun carry permit holders, but I am going to have to disagree with his choice of words (or the way Richard quoted him). A better statement would have been, “…the shooter could have been killed before…” After all, not even the police in Alabama have been able to put together a solid timeline of how all of these murders transpired, and we are not really sure if Doe stopped his car to shoot the random people along the road, shot them on the move, or how it all happened. I will not deny that having a handgun carrier nearby to the events as they happened might have resulted in a decreased body count, but it is overly optimistic to consider it a guarantee.
In any case, I would think that most rational people, if given the choice, would have preferred to be armed in such a situation as the one Doe created, than be unarmed – at least then they would have the option of fighting back, even if the option was denied to them or rendered ineffective by surprise or circumstances.

The Judiciary Committee also recommended approval of a bill by Rep. Curry Todd, R-Collierville, to allow handgun-carry permit holders to carry their guns into restaurants that serve alcohol — as long as they refrain from drinking liquor, wine or beer themselves and as long as they have their guns out of the restaurants by 11 p.m. Restaurants that limit admission to those 18 and up (usually under the provisions of Tennessee’s optional smoking ban in restaurants) would still be off limits for guns.

Rep. Brian Kelsey, R-Germantown, tried unsuccessfully to amend the 11 p.m. curfew from the bill, which he said he favored to simplify the regulations. Kelsey’s amendment died for lack of a seconding motion.

Well, it is a good thing that the bill is moving forward, but it is rather unfortunate that Representative Kelsey was unable to get a second on his proposed amendment… But, like I said, baby steps. We have to start somewhere, and at least this is movement in the right direction.
Also, do those restaurants with age limitations have to post their entrances accordingly, or is it just “common knowledge” that X restaurant only admits people over 18?
And, to be fair, I will have to give Richard some credit – he managed to get through two whole sections of this article without soiling his pantaloons or lying by omission. He even mentioned that handgun carry permit holders would still be barred from drinking, even though they would be allowed in restaurants where alcohol is being served. Good job! See how not-hard it is to report the news without significant bigotry and bias bleeding through from between the lines?

The committee deferred action for one week on a bill that would open parks operated by cities, municipalities and counties to guns carried by permit holders. The bill, sponsored by Rep. Harry Tindell, D-Knoxville, originally would have required all local parks to be opened to guns carried by permit holders, but an amendment proposes to allow local legislative bodies — city councils and county commissions — to choose for themselves whether to open all their parks, some of their parks, none of their parks or portions of parks.

Oh God save us… this bill is going to turn into a bleeding nightmare. Yes, I know, I said “baby steps”, but when the baby steps on a landmine, you suddenly wish you had taken a little bit longer of a stride. Some sort of requirement had better be integrated into this bill requiring localities to throughly post which parks or portions of parks are off-limits to handgun carry permit holders carrying their firearms, and which are not, otherwise this is just going to turn into a beautiful baiting tactic for certain localities. Keeping track of what cities allow handguns, what counties allow handguns, which specific parks or sections of parks allow handguns… yeah, this is going to turn into a pain in the ass.
Which is probably why Richard is just reporting it, rather than jumping all over it in his previously-shown, biased manner – it might be a victory for self-defense advocates, but it is a pyrrhic one at best.

Another controversial bill that would close public access to all information about handgun-carry permit holders and fine anyone that “published” the identities of any permit holder, was delayed for a week at the request of its sponsor, Rep. Eddie Bass, D-Pulaski, who has been ill for the past week.

What is with the quotes around the word “published”? You would think someone working at a newspaper would have a fairly good grasp as to what that word means and entails – far be it for me to assume, though.
Additionally, is the fine still going to be part of the punishment? The last Commercial Appeal report on this particular bill indicated that the fine was going to be replaced with allowing anyone damaged by the Commercial Appeal’s privacy-invading database of handgun carry permit holders to sue said newspaper.
Otherwise, I cannot really fault Representative Bass over the delay… after my recent bout with illness, it is funny how things sometimes slide.

Finally, the committee recommended approval of a bill that would prohibit the state from obtaining any identifying information of the kind of gun that permit holders have or receive their mandatory training with. The state Department of Safety has been requesting the make, manufacturer and model number of the handguns that permit applicants received their training on, as part of an effort to verify that the training occurred, but the department’s legislative liaison, Roger Hutto, told the committee that existing state law doesn’t authorize the agency to require such information.

Given that the Tennessee Department of Safety tried (and failed) to collect the serial numbers (which, I guess, is what Richard means by “model number”) of handguns used in handgun carry permit classes, this particular move does not really surprise me. In reality, the apart from rather inconsequential statistical analysis, the TNDoS does not need any of that information, and I am certainly ok with any government knowing as little as possible about the firearms I might or might not own.
Ok, so the latter half of this article really was not all that bad, and I should probably thank Richard for that. He was able to present the news factually and free from most obvious bias, which is something every news reporter should strive to do. On the other hand, his intentional and flagrant association of handgun carry permit holders with murderers, especially the most recent one down in Alabama, is absolutely despicable. Discussion of that tragic event belonged in an entirely separate article, such that no guilt by association, intended or unintentional, could be inferred.
Like I said back at the beginning of this post, this is a newspaper with a privacy-invading database of handgun carry permit holders, and who is not above equating handgun carry permit holders with felons elsewhere on their site, so I guess I should not really be all that surprised.