The recent string of multiple-victim incidents of gun violence and police shootings of black Americans has once again resulted in renewed calls for restrictions on gun ownership. President Biden has said that executive instructions to various branches of the Federal government will attempt to reduce the frequency and possibility of such violence.
A Michigan-based ammunition shop is refusing to sell to any customer who voted for President Joe Biden in the 2020 election. ” We’ve had a few potential customers call this morning to ask why they have to check a box stating they did not vote for Joe Biden in order to purchase our ammunition,” Fenix Ammunition tweeted yesterday morning.
So which is it when private companies get political—a brave and respectable act, or something that should be totally disallowed and result in anyone who tries it getting destroyed?
Conservatives can’t have it both ways.
Neither can Leftists. If the rule is, “private businesses can refuse to do business because they don’t feel like it”, they should not be too surprised when conservatives decide to play by the same rule.
Anyone reading this blog knows that I am a strong proponent of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, among other things for the defense of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. In particular, when it comes to liberty, as, in the final extreme, as a defense against government tyranny. I have also written, […]Political Violence and the Second Amendment — The Writer in Black
The Second Amendment is there in case the First Amendment breaks down.
Last week’s installment of this updated series asked a fundamental question: Do human beings have an unalienable right to self-defense? There is no question the founding fathers of our constitutional, representative republic—we are not a democracy, thank God–believed they do–they must–and they acknowledged–not created–that unalienable, individual right in the Second Amendment. This was finally–in 2008 and 2010 […]Guns And Liberty, 2021: Part 2 — Stately McDaniel Manor
THIS H.L. MENCKEN ESSAY ON GUN CONTROL FROM 1925 is still gold. The new law that it advocated, indeed, is one of the most absurd specimens of jackass legislation ever heard of, even in this paradise of legislative donkeyism. Its single and sole effect would be to exaggerate enormously all of the evils it proposes to put down.
Kyle Rittenhouse, the young defender of lives and property during the Kenosha riots, who shot three mob members who unprovokedly attacked him as he ran from them, was released on bail from Kenosha County Jail, on Friday, 20 November, 2020.
And since a technologically advanced society can’t be disarmed, even if it wants to be, it will ultimately be necessary to roll things back.
Do BLM rioters rule the streets, eclipsing the rights of all other Americans? Can rogue progressive prosecutors ignore the 2nd Amendment and the right to self-defense? Those issues go to the heart of the Kyle Rittenhouse case and the new Jim Snow Movement.
One of the questions involving the Kyle Rittenhouse defensive engagements in Kenosha, Wisconsin, just before midnight on the 25th of August, 2020, is if Kyle was forbidden from carrying an AR15 rifle, because Kyle was, at that time, four months short of his 18th birthday.
The explanation of the law at ar15.com is very good. However, I thought it could profitably be elaborated for those who do not read the law extensively.
Wisconsin Statute 948.60 regulates the possession of a dangerous weapon by persons under 18 years old. In paragraph (2) (a) it states:
(a) Any person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.
Paragraph (3) lists exceptions. (3)(c) excludes most people who are under 18, except those in violation of 941.28 or 29.304 and 29.539.
except those in violation of 941.28 or 29.304 and 29.539.
(c) This section applies only to a person under 18 years of age who possesses or is armed with a rifle or a shotgun if the person is in violation of s. 941.28 or is not in compliance with ss. 29.304 and 29.593. This section applies only to an adult who transfers a firearm to a person under 18 years of age if the person under 18 years of age is not in compliance with ss. 29.304 and 29.593 or to an adult who is in violation of s. 941.28.
Statute 948.60 only applies to a person under the age of 18 who are in violation of 941.28 or not in compliance with 29.304 and 29.593.
What does it take to be in violation of 941.28? Here is the statute:
(2) No person may sell or offer to sell, transport, purchase, possess or go armed with a short-barreled shotgun or short-barreled rifle.
In the statute, short-barreled shotguns or short-barreled rifles are those which require a special license under the National Firearms Act. In general, those are rifles with a barrel less than 16 inches in length or shotguns with a barrel less than 18 inches in length, or which have an over all length less than 26 inches.
The rifle carried by Kyle Rittenhouse, as an ordinary AR15 type, does not fall into those categories, so Kyle was not violating 941.28.
Was Kyle in violation of Wisconsin statute 29.304 and statute 29.539? These statutes deal with hunting regulation and with people under the age of 16 carrying rifles and shotguns. First, statute 29.304:
29.304 Restrictions on hunting and use of firearms by persons under 16 years of age.
(b) Restrictions on possession or control of a firearm. No person 14 years of age or older but under 16 years of age may have in his or her possession or control any firearm unless he or she:
Kyle is reported to be over 16 years old, so he was not violating statute 29.304.
How about statute 29.539?
29.593 Requirement for certificate of accomplishment to obtain hunting approval.
Kyle was not hunting, so statute 29.539 does not apply.
To sum up: Wisconsin statutes 948.60 only forbids people under the age of 18 from possessing or carrying dangerous weapons in very limited cases. If a person is 16 years of age or older, the statute only applies to rifles and shotguns which are covered under the National Firearms Act as short barreled rifles or shotguns. People who are hunting have to comply with the hunting regulations, and there are general restrictions for people under the age of 16.
Upon occasion, one stumbles on something rare and precious, something almost unthinkable and seldom seen. In this case, an honest leftist writing about the Second Amendment. May I introduce, gentle readers, Leah Libresco, writing at, of all places, The Washington Post, that former newspaper that thinks one of the most vicious and barbaric terrorists that ever lived “an austere religious scholar.”She is, in this field, refreshing:
View original post 1,391 more words