…for his guestblogging here over the past week. For more of Dave’s writing, check out his main site as well as the Volokh Conspiracy.
Posts Tagged ‘guns’
Licensed Handgun Carry Wins in Kansas
Over-riding the Governor’s veto, the Kansas legislature has enacted a “Shall Issue” law for issuing licenses to carry a concealed handgun for lawful protection. Before, Kansas was one of only four states without any provision for issuing concealed handgun licenses. One of the remaining three states, Nebraska, appears poised to enact a similar law, which the Governor has said he will sign.
Kansas is now among the 39 states which have a fair procedure to allow citizens to carry handguns for protection. Along with the three states (Nebraska, Wisconsin, IIllinois) that currently do not issue permits, eight other states issue permits according to the whim of a local official (Hawaii, California, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Delaware). A Shall Issue bill is moving through the legislature in Delaware. Rhode Island already has a Shall Issue law, although the law is nullified by administrative practice.
In Wisconsin, a Shall Iissue bill has been vetoed twice, with the vetos sustained by only one or two votes. In every state where Shall Issue proponents have gotten as close as they have in Wisconsin, the state has always eventually enacted a Shall Issue law–although sometimes the process can take a while.
So of the eleven remaining states that are not Shall Issue, two of them (Nebraska and Wisconsin) are nearly certain to change at some point in the future, and there is reasonable possiblity of change in Delaware. All that Rhode Island needs to change is the election of Attorney General who will not interfere with the state law that local goverments must issue carry permits to qualified applicants.
So the number of Shall Issue states could be 43 in the not too distant future. In the seven hold-out states, Shall Issue has passed one body of the legislature at least once in the three largest states: California, New York, and Illinois.
Every year, more and more Shall Issue states create “reciprocity” with each other, so that a person with a permit from her home state can carry her firearm lawfully in a other state while visiting. Currently, a carry permit issued by one state is valid in over half of all states. (See Packing.org for details.)
As the combined total of “no issue” or “whimsical issue” states declines into the single digits, and reciprocity continues to spread, it seems hard to deny that America is concluding that Shall Issue is sensible gun control — one that regulates firearms carrying but does not infringe the right to self-defense.
For more on the Kansas law, see this excellent article in the Wichita Eagle.
Journal on Fireams & Public Policy now accepting submissions
I am the Editor of an iinterdisciplinary academic journal, the Journal on Firearms and Public Policy. The Journal is now accepting submissions for its next volume, our 18th year of publication. Some sample issues, in PDF, are here. (We hope eventually to put all volumes on-line.) Because we are interdiscplinary, articles may be written in a variety of academic and citation styles, including law, history, social science, philosophy, and so forth. The JFPP’s circulation is vastly larger than most academic journals. If you would like to submit an article, or send a query about possible submission, please write me at the e-mail link on the lower-left column of my website.
Stand Your Ground
Back in 1987, Florida set off a national trend by enacting a law which allows adults with a clean record, who pass a safety class, to obtain a permit to carry a concealed handgun for lawful defense. Although some states already allowed concealed carry, Florida’s 1987 law led to the concept spreading nationally, so that today 38 states have handgun carry laws similar to Florida’s. Now, a new Florida trend is spreading: “Stand your ground” laws.
Last year, Florida enacted a statute stating that victims of a violent felony attack do not have to retreat from the aggressor (even in a public place), and can use deadly force. Now, Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels has signed a Stand Your Ground law in his state, and the South Dakota legislature has enacted a similar law.
Because most Americans intuitively agree with the principle of self-defense, opponents of the law, such as the Brady Center, have resorted to making silly claims, such as asserting that the laws allow “a person who just feels something bad is going to happen to open fire in public.” A careful look at the Florida model, which I blogged about last year, leads to the conclusion that the Brady Center’s claims are unmerited.
Welcome guestblogger Dave Kopel
I’ll be away on family business for a while, but our newest guestblogger, research director David Kopel of the Colorado-based Independence Institute, should have no trouble filling the gap. Well known as a participant at the Volokh Conspiracy, Dave is among the nation’s most prominent scholars on firearms and Second Amendment controversies, as well as a columnist at Denver’s Rocky Mountain News and a commentator on many other issues related to individual liberty. Welcome!
One-stop Shopping for Gun Thieves
In today’s National Post, Canadian columnist Lorne Gunter reports an interview with John Hicks, the former Webmaster for the Canadian Firearms Centre (CFC). The CFC is the national gun control center, which is supposed to maintain the registry of all rifles and shotguns which was created by the former Liberal government in 1995 legislation. According to Gunter, Hicks “contends that anyone with a home computer, an Internet connection and a little patience can hack into the national firearms database and find out who owns guns, where they live and what makes and models they possess.” The CFC computers are known to have been breached 306 times between 1995 and 2003. The computer registry has cost over half a billion Canadian dollars so far, and still doesn’t work. Gunter reports that last December, the contractor “flew in folks from around Canada with the intention they would stay in Ottawa and do testing for six weeks.” But “After one day, all were sent home because the application crashed over 90 times with over 30 Severity-1 crashes.” The new Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper has promised to abolish the dysfunctional long gun registry, and spend the savings on the police; however, Harper leads a minority government so it is not clear if he will be able to accomplish his objective. A research paper by professor Gary Mauser for the Fraser Institute provides the full story on the long gun registry debacle.
Update: Judge tosses Ileto v. Glock
Huge, though not at this point surprising, victory for the firearms industry: “A new ban on lawsuits against gun makers caused a Los Angeles judge to toss out negligence claims the family of a slain mail carrier filed against Glock and a gun distributor”. An earlier decision by the Ninth Circuit to let Ileto v. Glock go forward had been considered one of the most important victories for the gun-control-through-litigation campaign, but the U.S. Congress had other ideas. (Jennifer English, “Judge tosses gun suit”, City News Service/San Gabriel Valley Tribune, Mar. 11). For our earlier coverage, see Nov. 20, Nov. 26 and Dec. 2, 2003. (& welcome Instapundit readers).
Proliferation of Taser Suits
Taser International has experienced tremendous growth over the last few years, but now is facing a growing number of lawsuits. Some of these suits narrowly focus on police departments for their use of the Taser, while others name Taser itself in defective product suits. A quick scan of the news over just the last few days reveals suits in Georgia, Ohio, Tennessee, Canada, Florida, and Minnesota.
Taser claims that many of these suits have been dismissed. Taser faces some of the same problems faced by vaccine makers and even airbag makers – their product clearly saves lives vs. the alternative (i.e. getting shot with a real gun), but this “safer product” value proposition gets confused with “completely safe,” which leads to careless use and mistaken expectations.
Restraining Letterman, frivolously
From “Vic” in the Volokh comments, on the furor over that temporary restraining order against David Letterman [typos cleaned up]:
I think this illustrates the problem with trying to enumerate how many lawsuits are frivolous.
Most attempts at enumerating the amount of frivolous lawsuits have focused on asking judges about their perception of the number of frivolous lawsuits that pass through their corthouse. And the judges say: a trivial amount. I have always felt that the reason this number is said to be trivial is that the judge who allows a garbage lawsuit to go to trial, when he/she could have stopped it from proceeding further, is not going to say: Yeah, it was frivolous, but I didn’t want to throw it out when I could have.
Also David Kopel examines the question of whether it’s now illegal for Letterman to possess a gun (Volokh, Dec. 22). Update Jan. 2 (judge lifts order).
Gun dealers’ liability for crimes
Despite the enactment of the federal pre-emption bill, some politicians, like New York Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, are still pushing the idea:
Gun dealers could be held liable if they sell weapons that are later used to commit a crime under an Assembly proposal that’s under fire by gun-rights proponents.
The measure’s chances for passage are considered remote, though. (Heather Yakin and John Milgrim, “Gun dealers balk at proposal to hold them liable”, Middletown, N.Y. Times Herald-Record, Dec. 20).