walls of the city

giving new life

Linoge — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 01:37:53 +0000

In my stumbling and bumbling around the internet, I have to ask whether or not this is such a good idea:

These unique Chilean Mausers have been converted to fire .308 and are in good condition. They are Pre-1898, and therefore an antique by definition. This means we can ship these directly to an individual, and the gun does NOT need to go through a dealer.

These rugged rifles make an excellent addition to any collection, a genuine, battle-used rifle built like a tank. These are fully functional, firing rifles!

To begin with, the 8mm Mauser round has a maximum pressure allowable of 57,000 psi, and the .308 Winchester round pushes out 62,000 psi, and while the .308 round is smaller in almost all dimensions than the 8mm Mauser round, I still have to wonder how well those modifications will remain attached to the firearm… Couple that with literally 100+ year-old metals, and the pucker-factor increases beyond my comfort level.

On the other hand, antique firearms require no background checks, do not need to be passed through FFL’s hands, do not need Form 4473s filled out on them, can be shipped straight to your door without a Curio and Relic license, and do not need to be documented anywhere. A rifle that can be delivered to my door, no questions asked, no records kept, and can handle modern, commonly-available calibers… well, that temptation just about overcomes the puckerness. Hm.

send it downrange:

situational awareness fail

Linoge — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 00:43:39 +0000

All I can really say is that we grow them dumb around here.

send it downrange:

taking count

Linoge — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 00:21:49 +0000

So we actually ended up receiving two census forms – one at our apartment and one at our house. Unsurprisingly, both letters were wrapped in the same envelope proclaiming, “YOUR RESPONSE IS REQUIRED BY LAW.”

I do not think they want me to respond to both of them – in fact, I am fairly certain it would be a violation of law to respond to both of them, but I never credited the federal government with an overabundance of intelligence.

In any case, one of the forms will eventually make it back to some GS-2, who will open it up and see that Block 1 has a “2″ in it, and the rest of the form is blank. Although, depending on how ornery I feel in the morning, Block 9 might have “Some other race” checked, with “American” as the fill-in-the-blank answer… You all are more than welcome to do with your forms as you see fit, and whatever consequences there are for your decisions will be yours and yours alone… and the same goes for me.

send it downrange:

funny how things work out

Linoge — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 23:27:11 +0000

Well, this is starting to get interesting. As I mentioned yesteday, good ol’ Leonard Embody / kwikrnu had his handgun carry permit revoked by the state of Tennessee on the basis that he “poses a material likelihood of risk to the public”. What I did not mention, because I did not know it at the time, is that determination was directly related to this letter from the Belle Meade police department:

I [Lieutenant Robert Eckerman] am the Criminal Investigator for the Belle Meade Poilce Department and in that capacity request that the Handgun Carry permit issued to Leonard Stanni Embody be revoked.

This request is not made lightly and based on the increasingly unsafe methods of displaying and/or carrying a firearm by Leonard Stanni Embody over the past 24 months.

Leonard Stanni Embody has shown by his actions that he is repeatedly engaging in behavior while carrying or displaying a firearm that compromises the safety of the general public, responding law enforcement officers, and his own

On January 22, 2010 Leonard Stanni embody did knowingly and willfully carry a weapon within the City Limits of Belle Meade. Leonard Stanni Embody did carry the weapon in an unsafe manner, in an unsafe location and in an unsafe condition. Tennessee Code Annotated 39-17-1342 (a) (3) states that any actions by the permit holder that poses a material likelihood of risk or harm to the public will be grounds to suspend or revoke a handgun permit.

Recent incidents have been well documented and published by Leonard Stanni Embody clearly show that his actions clearly are for his own benefit and do not represent the actions of a responsible citizen wishing to safely carry a handgun for legitimate purposes.

As a reminder for those who have not been keeping up with kwikrnu’s exploits, he openly carried, in his hand, a replica of a Navy Model 1851 blackpowder revolver, and was unsurprisingly stopped and questioned by Belle Meade police officers. The city ordinances of that area are somewhat peculiar, predate Tennessee’s preemption laws, and read:

11-602. Weapons and firearms generally.
It shall be unlawful for any person to carry in any manner whatever, with the intent to go armed, any razor, dirk, knife, blackjack, brass knucks, pistol, revolver, or any other dangerous weapon or instrument except the army or navy pistol which shall be carried openly in the hand. However, the foregoing prohibition shall not apply to members of the United States Armed Forces carrying such weapons as are prescribed by applicable regulations nor to any officer or policeman engaged in his official duties, in the execution of process, or while searching for or engaged in arresting persons suspected of having committed crimes. Furthermore, the prohibition shall not apply to persons who may have been summoned by such officer or policeman to assist in the discharge of his said duties. (Ord. 71-6, § 2.12. 1987 Code, § 10-212)

Leonard Embody / kwikrnu maintains that he was carrying the firearm with the barrel pointed at the ground, that his finger was not on the trigger, that the hammer was down on an empty chamber, that he wore a reflective vest in accordance with another Belle Meade ordinance, and that he obeyed the above ordinance by carrying the right model firearm in his hand.

I will 100% agree that having a revolver’s hammer down on an empty chamber is far from an “unsafe condition” – that model revolver has no real “safety”, per se, but in its current arrangement, a discharge would require the hammer to be completely pulled back and the trigger to be pulled. Likewise, I am not entirely sure how walking in the street (as required by Belle Meade – they do not have sidewalks, and instead make cars get out of the way of joggers/walkers – go figure) with a mandated reflective vest is an “unsafe location”, especially given that the incident was passed by joggers doing the same thing.

However, I will also 100% agree that carrying a firearm openly in your hand qualifies as an “unsafe manner” of doing so – not only are you more likely to drop it, or grip it more tightly and accidentally trip the trigger, but other handgun carriers (such as myself) are very likely to understandably misinterpret your actions and take necessary steps to keep our families and ourselves safe. Likewise, slinging an AK-47 style rifle across your back is unsafe in much the same manner, especially when the firearm in question was chosen specifically for its confusing appearance, and was decorated in a fashion to intentionally and maliciously deceive onlookers and police officers. I do not know to what other issues Lieutenant Sexton is referring in that 24-month window, but those two pretty much seal the deal for me.

Kwikrnu’s claim throughout the entire Belle Meade debacle was that he was only abiding by the above-quoted city ordinance, so obviously what he was doing was both safe and legal (*more on the “safe” part later). This is where the “interesting” kicks in – yesterday, the NRA-ILA put up an alert regarding Belle Meade, reading:

On Wednesday, March 17, the Belle Meade Board of Commissioners will consider a proposed ordinance (Ordinance 2010-2) that would forbid any person with a handgun carry permit to carry within the city limits.

Not only does this legislation create a victim zone inside Belle Meade by disarming law-abiding citizens, it is also a clear violation of Tennessee’s preemption statutes.

Belle Meade’s response?

“There is a rumor going around that we are going to ban handguns, guns in the city,” said Mayor Gray Thornburg.

She said the rumor is a “complete misunderstanding.” The city is merely realigning their ordinance to be in line with state regulations.

“I know that a whole bunch of people in Belle Meade own guns, and I’m sure that there are plenty who have permits to carry,” she said. “They are absolutely right. I wouldn’t violate somebody’s Second Amendment right by banning guns.”

The current Belle Meade municipal code includes a section on firearms and weapons that says “it is unlawful for any person to carry in any manner whatever, with the intent to go armed and razor, dirk, knife, blackjack, brass knuckles, pistol, revolver or any other dangerous weapon or instrument…”

It also includes the phrase “except the army or navy pistol which shall be carried openly in the hand.”

The new ordinance deletes the exception that would include the Navy black powder pistol Leonard Embody carried when he walked down Belle Meade Boulevard in mid-February.

You will notice that Mayor Thornburg very successfully defended herself from a particularly vicious strawman – no one, not even the NRA, claimed that Belle Meade was trying to ban all handguns or all firearms inside the city, but rather that they were considering an ordinance that would forbid anyone from carrying a handgun.

Now, as I mentioned, Tennessee does have preemption, which basically means localities within the states cannot regulate the ownership, transportation, carrying, or selling of firearms any more than the state does. Unfortunately, that preemption only activated in 1986, and any already-existing municipal codes were “grandfathered” in… and Belle Meade’s “in the hand” code is one such example. Furthermore, changing/editing an already-existing city ordinance is not treated as creating a new one by the state, so it is still grandfathered (and, yes, there is all manner of room for abuse in that arrangement).

So what does this intended ordinance-change actually do? It removes “except the army or navy pistol which shall be carried openly in the hand” from the above-quoted ordinance.

What does that do? Frankly, I have no idea. A commenter at OCDO has this insight:

Well the family lawyer got back to me this morning, he is a practicing attorney in Davidson County where this incident occured. here are some simple reasons why it is legal for HCP holders in TN to carry. It is considered a defense to the ~~red~~ [bold] portion of the law found in many local municipalities.

“Under T.C.A. § 39-17-1307(b) if you carry a firearm, with the intent to go armed, you could be charged with “unlawful possession” unless you have a “defense” recognized by law. Unlawful possession under this subsection of the Tennessee Code is a misdemeanor. ”

There are currently several statutory defenses available under the Tennessee Code. The most obvious defenses apply to those who have lawful gun carry permits issued by the Department of Safety or are otherwise authorized by law to carry firearms. (i.e. a police officer or member of the military)

kwik would have been completely legal to carry a holstered loaded pistol openly or concealed without worry. From what I told my attorney he believes simply kwik mis-interpreted the law.

That seems to be the impression that I, speaking as a non-lawyer, am getting from the Mayor’s statements and my reading of the ordinance as well – with the current verbiage, open carry of an Army or Navy revolver is legal with or without a handgun carry permit in Belle Meade, and all other forms of carry are legal with the permit. The city council appears to be considering just getting rid of the archaic “in the hand” bit, and relying solely on the state’s permitting process instead – but, again, I am not a lawyer, so I obviously have no clue what I am talking about.

Additionally, this seems like the kind of thing that could have been brought up at a city council meeting, with the observation that this ordinance is horribly out of date (bear in mind cartridge pistols started taking over shortly after the production of the Army/Navy Model 1851s), and the city might just have ended up doing exactly the same thing as it is doing now… only without the publicity orgy, the detain-and-question, and all the rest of the froofera. Of course, Leonard Embody / kwikrnu appears to have made absolutely no attempt to question or challenge this law in a letter to the city/mayor, or through an appearance at a city council meeting, and instead went straight for the method that would get him the most attention and the most exposure – apparently the term “escalation” is not in his vocabulary.

So where are we in all of this? In a continuation of a pre-existing pattern of attention-whoring, self-serving, potentially-dangerous activities, kwikrnu did something – something that might have been completely unecessary – to make a point, when that point could have been, far more easily, brought up in a simple conversation or letter, and, in the process, got his Handgun Carry Permit suspended for finally providing the state the proverbial straw that broke the proverbial camel’s back.

Is that a win? Sure, if you care about knocking down a potentially-irrelevant city ordinance, no matter the cost. Me, I just consider that pyrrhic idiocy.

(*) Legal does not necessarily equate to safe, and safe does not necessarily equate to legal. It is not, and never should have been, our government’s role, at any level, to legalize safe activities or ban unsafe activities.

(Courtesy of Everyday, No Days Off.)

(Obligatory disclaimer that I really should integrate with the terms of use: I am not a lawyer. I do not portray one on television. I did not sleep at a Holiday Inn last night. My understanding of the law is based on my own personal interpretation and reading of it, and should not be considered to be binding, factual, or actual. Likewise, any opinions expressed here are mine and mine alone, and are just that – opinions.)

send it downrange:

Timeline for HB3125

wizardpc — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 13:37:06 +0000

As you know, the House Judiciary Committee passed Restaurant Carry 2.0 last night. The bill’s sponsor, Curry Todd, came to the TFA meeting and I got a chance to speak with him about some things.

The process will go like this: The bill goes to the Budget Subcommittee first, probably next Tuesday. The week after, it will go to the full committee (Finance, Ways, and Means) because the bill has a positive fiscal note. Basically that means that it will cost the state less money if the bill passes, so it won’t be a problem.

After it passes out of Finance, it will go to the Calendar and Rules Committee, where they will add it to the calendar for the full House. Todd expects that to be mid-April.

I still don’t have the full text of the bill because it’s not posted on the State’s website. It’s not going to be what’s up there today. The bill as amended completely strips out the restriction on guns in places that serve alcohol.

Remember, what we have right now is a blanket prohibition on guns where alcohol is served under TCA 39-17-1305. Then we carve out exceptions for law enforcement, security personnel, and owners/managers/employees. HB3125 as ammended deletes 39-17-1305.

A judge cannot rule that the absence of a law is unconstitutional. Well, not without getting slapped by an appellate judge, they can’t.

It will still be illegal to carry without a permit, or while drinking, or into a place properly posted under 1359.
The bill also changes the posting requirements from “must be substantially similar to” to “must be” specific language. There was apparently some ambiguity on whether Randy Rayburn’s “No guns ever, free parking always” signs were legally binding so Todd and Sen. Jackson are clarifying that part of TCA 39-17-1359 and putting up a PDF on the state’s website that businesses can print out and stick on their doors, eliminating the “ZOMG Signs Cost Money!” argument.

I plan on being in the gallery for the House Vote. You are welcome to join me. As soon as a date is set, I’ll let you know.

send it downrange:

taking them to the ropes

Linoge — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 02:08:57 +0000

Some supposed pro-rights activists call open carry an “anathema” and do what they can to demonize those who would carry their firearms in the open, and otherwise expose the rotten bigotry still found throughout the ranks of gun owners.

Other pro-rights activists take the fight to the enemy, and win:

Frank was lawfully open-carrying on his own porch when Racine Police, who were summoned to his neighborhood on an unrelated call observed and questioned Frank because he was Open-carrying. After a few minutes of increasingly aggressive questioning Frank exercised his right to remain silent and was subsequently unlawfully arrested for obstruction of justice for refusing to give his name. In the state of Wisconsin no law allows officers to arrest for obstruction on a person’s refusal to give his or her name. “Mere silence is insufficient to constitute obstruction. Henes v. Morrissey, 194 Wis. 2d 339, 533 N.W.2d 802 (1995)”

Details of Frank’s encounter can be viewed by going to our website http://www.wisconsincarry.org and clicking on the October 16th blog entry.

Frank was unlawfully arrested and his firearm illegally siezed. He was later released without being charged.

Wisconsin Carry filed suit on Frank’s behalf for his unlawful detainment, arrest, and seizure of his firearm.

On behalf of myself, the board of Wisconsin Carry Inc. and all of our members, we are pleased to announce that The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin has entered a judgment in the amount of $10,000 in favor of Wisconsin Carry, Inc. and Frank Hannon-Rock and against the City of Racine and two Racine police officers.

In short, two police officers unnecessarily and illegally detained a law-abiding citizen simply because he was openly carrying a firearm, and now those two police officers, in addition to the city which employs them, are getting their hands rightfully slapped. Hopefully, this case and the judgement against the officers and city will serve as a deterrent against any other governmental representatives in Wisconsin who would operate outside the realm of what is legal… hopefully.

Sure, this incident never would have happened if the victim had not dared to legally openly carry his firearm… but then the two police officers and city involved never would have had the benefit of a learning experience, either. A law-abiding citizen’s rights were upheld, and an overbearing government was told to sit down and shut up… oh, and give some money to that citizen you unlawfully detained.

Smells like a win to me, and while it was a win for open carry in specific, it was also a win for all firearm carriers, all firearm owners, and all Americans in general. Something tells me not to expect that kind of admission, or even recognition, from the standard sources of ZOMGOPENCARRYISTHEENDOFGUNRIGHTSASWEKNOWTHEM!!!111!!! hysteria.

(Courtesy of Another Gun Blog and Guns and Coffee.)

send it downrange:

over the hump

Linoge — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 01:16:08 +0000

If you ever wanted to know why I will always regard anti-rights advocates like MikeB302000, Laci the ~~Dog~~ Bitch, Josh Sugarmann, Denis Hennigan, and others of their ilk with the highest disdain, Ayn Rand says it far better than I could:

Learn to distinguish the difference betwen errors of knowledge and breaches of morality. An error of knowledge is not a moral flaw, provided you are willing ot correct it; only a mystic would judge human beings by the standard of an impossible, automatic omniscience. But a breach of morality is the conscious choice of an action you know to be evil, or a willful evasion of knowledge, a suspension of sight and thought. That which you do not know, is not a moral charge against you; but that whcih you refuse to know, is an account of infamy growing in your soul. Make every allowance for errors of knowledge; do not forgive or accept any breach of morality. Give the benefit of the doubt to those who seek to know; but treat as potential killers thaose specimens of insolent depravity who make demands upon you, announcing that they have and seek no reasons, proclaiming, as a license, that they ‘just feel it’ – or those who reject an irrefutable argument by saying: ‘It’s only logic,’ which means: ‘It’s only reality.’ The only realm opposed to reality is the realm and premise of death.

These people have been shown the facts, figures, statistics, logic, and reality time and time and time again, and still consciously choose to remain willfully ignorant, still desire to control, govern, and limit free men based on their feelings and their feelings alone, and still continue to write it all off as “only logic”, if they can bring themselves to admit it at all. They are, indeed, aiding and abetting criminals by actively, intentionally, and maliciously seeking to leave law-abiding citizens disarmed and defenseless – unwilling victims fabricated by another person’s baseless desires. “Potential killers” indeed – some have even expressed the desire to be killers, while others have “rejoiced” at the senseless murder of an average American mother.

Such people are, by their very nature, intrinsically evil, and should be handled accordingly.

However, today’s Randian quoting does not stop there…:

The only proper purpose of a government is to protect man’s rights, which means: to protect him from physical violence. A proper government is only a policeman, acting as an agent of man’s self-defense, and, as such, may resort to force only against those who start the use of force. The only proper functions of a government are the police, to protect you from criminals; the army, to protect you from foreign invaders; and the courts, to protect your property and contracts from breach or fraud by others, to settle disputes by rational rules, according to objective law. But a government that initiates the employment of force against men who had forced no one, the employment of armed compulsion against disarmed victims, is a nightmare infernal machine designed to annihilate morality: such a government reverses its only moral purpose and switches from the role of protector to the role of man’s deadliest enemy, from the role of policeman to the role of criminals vested with the right to the wielding of violence against victims deprived of the right of self-defense. Such a government substitutes for morality the following rule of social conduct: you may do whatever you please to your neighbor, provided your gang is bigger than his.

Remind you of any governments you know?

For those who have read the book in question, you will know that those two above quotes come out of John Galt’s three-hour, 56-page radio address / monologue / speech. Speaking as someone who actually managed to read that thing, in its entirety, and is damned close to finishing its entire host book, let me say this: if you are interested in reading Atlas Shrugged, get the book from a library, flip to page 923 (assuming the Penguin 50th Anniversary Edition printing), read from the middle of it to the end of page 979, and return the book whence it came.

In those 56 pages, Ayn laid out the moral, reason, rationale, and cause celebre of the book in sufficiently plain language and logic that anyone with at least a high school freshman’s reading comprehension ability (accounting for the decline of the American education system, natch) could grasp it, and do so without the superfluous, holier-than-thou, strawman-burning, mysoginy-wrapped-in-kink, repeatedly-bash-your-head-in-with-a-sledgehammer, have-you-gotten-the-message-yet pontification delivered by cardboard characters that fills the other 1002 pages. This is not to say that the speech is a particularly easy or quick read, but at least it is shorter than the book as a whole.

But, hey, if you go in for that kind of thing, knock yourself out – I was just trying to save you some time. If only I had not promised myself I would read this gorramed book cover-to-cover…

send it downrange:

cheaper than hysteria

Linoge — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 01:00:09 +0000

Alright, I know a lot of people say a lot of good things about Cheaper Than Dirt. I know a lot of people are getting some amount of money from them in the form of advertisements, endorsements, and sponsorships. I know CTD’s blog’s author stops by here periodically, and has put up a lot of useful posts regarding just about every topic related to firearms.

But this is just damned silly:

Emergency and Survival Kits When an emergency hits, we don’t always have enough warning to prepare for it. The movie 2012 released on November 13, describes what could potentially happen on 12/21/2012 based on the end of the Ancient Mayan calendar. Throughout history, the Mayan calendar correctly identified evolutionary events. According to the calendar we are now in the Fourth and Final age. Whether you believe or not, it still makes you think, what if all the electronics suddenly stopped working, an asteroid struck the earth, sunspots erase magnetic stored data, a flu pandemic effected millions, would you be able to survive with what you currently have. Fortunately you have time to prepare and we have taken the guess work out of it for you.

The reality of 2012 seems far fetched, but are you prepared for hurricanes, earth quakes, extended power outages, a wide spread pandemic, or turmoil from the Middle East? The primary requirements are food, fuel, water, and shelter; our kits contain basic survival items. FEMA, Homeland Security, and other Emergency Response Teams look to us to fulfill their needs during emergencies. We are experts at supplying the gear you need to survive.

Perfect for at home or the office, there is enough basic survival gear for a family of four for 30 days, these are good to have on hand for natural disasters or the 2012 phenomenon.

(Emphasis added, as if it was necessary.)

Yes, because using a fictional movie based on a largely exploited, overhyped, and misinterpreted ancient calendar and featuring debunked and fallacious theories is obviously a good way to advertise and sensationalize your product!

Well, that “sensationalize” part might actually be right.

To their (limited) credit, they did admit that the events portrayed in the movie are “far fetched”… right before they again capitalized on the name- and fear-recognition of the “2012 phenomenon” right at the end of their advertisement. *sigh*

Believe me, I understand being prepared for the unexpected – much to my wife’s chagrin, I am already making plans for various corners of the house, what we can store where, what we can get now that we have the space/ability to keep it, and so forth. Even in the apartment, we had enough food in long-term, dessicant-filled storage to last the both of us upwards of a month if we had to – our only limitation was water, and we had contingencies for that as well. But those preparations were and will be made with the knowledge that actual bad things like record-freezing temperatures, earthquakes, floods, and whatever-the-hell else do happen… unlike things like the Earth’s crust melting, destabilizing, and spinning around.

As we discussed not too long ago here, people are more than within their rights, and more than welcome, to advertise their products however they see fit… and I am completely within my rights to call them out when I see them basing those advertisements on the fear of a silly fictional fabrication, especially when there is enough real bad stuff going on already.

send it downrange:

wave good-bye to your money

Linoge — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 00:46:51 +0000

Part of the reason taxes spool me right the hell up every year is that every time I look at my finalized W-2, I get to see 6.2% of my income stolen away from me, never to be seen again, in the form of a payment into the black box of “Social Security” (what a misnomer). Oh, sure, the original plan was that 6.2% would go into some kind of investment account that would accrue interest as I continued to deposit into it over the years, and then I would have that account available to me to live off of when I retired… but the system stopped working that way years ago. Thanks to mismanagement and doubly thanks to our Benificent Government borrowing out of the Social Security pool, that money goes into the system just long enough to go right back out and into the pockets of our grandparents, which is great for them, and disastrous for us – pyramid schemes can only last so long.

And, unfortunately, it is looking like it is time to pay the piper:

For more than two decades, Social Security collected more money in taxes than it paid out in benefits — billions more each year.

Not anymore. This year, for the first time since the 1980s, when Congress last overhauled Social Security, the retirement program is projected to pay out more in benefits than it collects in taxes — nearly $29 billion more.

Sounds like a good time to start tapping the nest egg. Too bad the federal government already spent that money over the years on other programs, preferring to borrow from Social Security rather than foreign creditors. In return, the Treasury Department issued a stack of IOUs — in the form of Treasury bonds — which are kept in a nondescript office building just down the street from Parkersburg’s municipal offices.

Now the government will have to borrow even more money, much of it abroad, to start paying back the IOUs, and the timing couldn’t be worse. The government is projected to post a record $1.5 trillion budget deficit this year, followed by trillion dollar deficits for years to come.

A lot of people far more versed in economic matters than I are saying that this was pretty much the Rubicon:

Technically, Social Security is now broke. Since it’s politically unthinkable to admit this, the Treasury will have to go cap in hand to the bond markets and buy more short-term debt in order to keep the benefits flowing. This will heavily increase a structural federal deficit that is already unsustainable.

And lest you think this is not going to be something you are going to have to worry about until some nebulous point in the future, you would be wrong:

The U.S. and the U.K. have moved “substantially” closer to losing their AAA credit ratings as the cost of servicing their debt rose, according to Moody’s Investors Service.

If we lose that rating, it will mean Very Bad Things (TM) for the bond market, the American dollar, and our economy as a whole.

I guess we chose a hell of a time to buy a house… On the one hand, mortage rates were absurdly low, and we now have the space to have a garden, store all manner of things, and modify things as we see fit. On the other hand, we are now out a lot of money that could be used to prepare for what is looking to be a very rough-and-rocky next few years… Here is to hoping that it is nowhere near as bad as a lot of people are starting to think…

(This Tuesday-dstroying news is courtesy of Say Uncle.)

send it downrange:

Restaurant Carry 2.0: House Judiciary 3/16

wizardpc — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 22:54:32 +0000

Proposed ammendment (by Chairman Coleman?) on the bill to allow the “International No Guns” symbol in leiu of the proper signage. Tabled (killed).

Proposed ammendment by Sontonay removes liability from restaurantuers for actions taken by carry permit holders inside the restaurant. Tabled (killed), though I think this one was reasonable. Probably killed because Sontonay brought it up.

Bill passes out of committee. 8-4. Goes to Finance Ways and Means

send it downrange: