Tacking Into The Wind

As John Lott reports, The Washington Times has an excellent editorial up about the failure of fireworks regulation. I’m sure that the three year fireworks related death rate (0.014 – 0.018 per million) would be much, much lower if you excluded those not following common sense usage instructions. Why must we over regulate to protect the stupid at the expense of the masses?

Government can protect people from only so much, and if we banned all the products that caused more deaths and injuries than fireworks, there would be virtually nothing left to use. The freedom we celebrate on the Fourth of July doesn’t mean much if we criminalize even the tiny risks associated with fireworks.

John Adams, a signer of the Declaration of Independence and our second president, wrote that Independence Day “will be celebrated by succeeding generations as the great anniversary festival.” This great day “ought to be celebrated by pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires and illuminations from one end of this continent to the other, from this time forward forever more,” he said. Hopefully, American enthusiasm for freedom isn’t fizzling like so many Roman candles this weekend.

The Philadelphia Inquirer Editorial published an editorial today in support of Michael Bloomburg’s Mayors Against Illegal Guns.

In addition to Philadelphia, officials in Pittsburgh, Allentown, Reading, Easton, Pottsville, and Wilkinsburg have adopted such ordinances in hopes of forcing the hand of lawmakers who toe the National Rifle Association line.

Translation: Seven cities in Pennsylvania, while in a period of financial hardship, are wasting money defending illegal ordinances, in hopes of forcing the hand of lawmakers who to the Constitutional line.

As it happened, the city did come away with something: The court left untouched the city’s lost-and-stolen reporting requirement, its restrictions on gun ownership by people under domestic-abuse court orders, and its right to seize weapons when someone is regarded as a threat. That’s for now, since the case likely is headed to the state Supreme Court.

While the editorial is correct in that the court did leave these ordinances intact, the court only addressed the issue of standing, not the legality of these ordinances. The editorial board manages to leave this part out.

Fox 29 has a story on their website deriding the rise in out of state carry permits being issued to Philadelphia residents.

These permits to carry weapons can be obtained over the Internet. They are inexpensive and authorities say they are easy to get.

Let’s look to see exactly how easy on of these Florida concealed weapons permits are to get.

Who Is Eligible To Be Licensed?
Any person who meets the following minimum eligibility requirements can obtain a license:
• You must be a legal U.S. resident.
• You must be 21 years of age or older.
• You must be able to demonstrate competency with a firearm.
Who Is NOT Eligible?
There are several disqualifying conditions that will result in the ineligibility of the applicant and the denial of the application. Possible reasons for denial include the following:
• The physical inability to handle a firearm safely.
• A felony conviction (unless civil and firearm rights have been restored by the convicting authority).
• Having adjudication withheld or sentence suspended on a felony or misdemeanor crime of violence unless three years have elapsed since probation or other conditions set by the court have been fulfilled.
• A conviction for a violent crime in the last three years, either misdemeanor or felony.
• A conviction for violation of controlled substance laws or multiple arrests for such offenses.
• A record of drug or alcohol abuse.
• Two or more DUI convictions within the previous 3 years.
• Being committed to a mental institution or adjudged incompetent or mentally defective.
• Failing to provide proof of proficiency with a firearm.
• Having been issued a domestic violence injunction or an injunction against repeat violence that is currently in force.
• Renouncement of U.S. citizenship.
• A dishonorable discharge from the armed forces.
• Being a fugitive from justice.

In addition, a to be issued a Florida Concealed Weapon Permit, an applicant must supply a passport-style photograph, a set of fingerprints, proof of firearms training, and $117. Doesn’t seem like a cheap, easy to obtain over the internet permit anymore, does it?

USA 2 – 0 ESP

A Pennsylvania court has overruled the City of Philadelphia’s Assalt Weapon Ban in a 6-1 decision. As I have written in the past, state wide preemption is necessary to protect our rights guaranteed by Article 1, Section 21 of the Pennsylvania Constitution: “The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned.”

I. The 30th day of May, 1868, is designated for the purpose of strewing with flowers, or otherwise decorating the graves of comrades who died in defense of their country during the late rebellion, and whose bodies now lie in almost every city, village, and hamlet churchyard in the land. In this observance no form or ceremony is prescribed, but Posts and comrades will, in their own way, arrange such fitting services and testimonials of respect as circumstances may permit.

We are here to play, Comrades, as our regulations tell us, for the purpose among other things, “of preserving and strengthening those kind and fraternal feelings which have bound together the soldiers sailors and Marines, who united to suppress the late rebellion.” What can aid more to assure this result than by cherishing tenderly the memory of our heroic dead? We should guard their graves with sacred vigilance. All that the consecrated wealth and taste of the nation can add to their adornment and security, is but a fitting tribute to the memory of her slain defenders. Let pleasant paths invite the coming and going of reverent visitors and fond mourners. Let no neglect, no ravages of time, testify to the present or to the coming generations that we have forgotten as a people the cost of a free and undivided republic.

If other eyes grow dull and other hands slack, and other hearts cold in the solemn trust, ours shall keep it well as long as the light and warmth of life remain in us.

Let us, then, at the time appointed, gather around their sacred remains, and garland the passionless mounds above them with choicest flowers of springtime; let us raise above them the dear old flag they saved; let us in this solemn presence renew our pledge to aid and assist those whom they have left among us a sacred charge upon the Nation’s gratitude—the soldiers and sailors widow and orphan.

II. It is the purpose of the Commander in Chief to inaugurate this observance with the hope that it will be kept up from year to year, while a survivor of the war remains to honor the memory of his departed comrades. He earnestly desires the public press to call attention to this Order, and lend its friendly aid in bringing it to the notice of comrades in all parts of the country in time for simultaneous compliance therewith.

III. Department commanders will use every effort to make this Order effective.

—General Orders No. 11, Grand Army of the Republic Headquarters
John A. Logan, Commander in Chief, May 5, 1868

On 18 February 2009, The Intelligencer published an editorial calling for and end to state-wide preemption of firearm laws.  The editorial can be found here.

We also know that more laws won’t necessarily produce the desired effect of significantly reducing gun violence, and that those who do obey the law will have issues with yet more laws.

However, what’s been tried so far in the city hasn’t worked. And as with so many problems confronting the commonwealth, it doesn’t make sense to think that a one-size-fits-all gun law will be effective in a state that is hardly one-size-fits-all when it comes to anything.

My response was published on 5 March 2009:

I wish you would reconsider the conclusion that you reached in your recent editorial “Give the City a Chance.”  You argue that the larger municipalities in the state should be able to enact their own gun laws.

The statewide preemption of gun laws is necessary to protect the right guaranteed by Article 1, Section 21 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, “The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned.”

In addition to being unconstitutional, such laws do nothing to prevent crime.  As your own comments state, and a 2003 CDC study reported, “The Task Force found insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws or combinations of laws reviewed on violent outcomes.”  Such laws would not have prevented the recent murders of Philadelphia Police Officers Pawlowski, McDonald, and Liczbinski were all killed by convicted felons with long criminal histories who never should have been released from prison.  Their murders were not deterred by the federal prohibition against felons owning firearms, and would not be deterred by further restrictions.

The way to prevent further tragedies is to keep the criminally dangerous locked up in prison, not to further restrict the rights of those living in the high crime areas, who are most exposed to the dangerous elements of our society.