Daily Digest: Signs & Signals Edition

Alan Korwin ad courtesy phoenixnewtimes.com

In 2010, Phoenix (AZ) gun law expert Alan Korwin paid $11,000 to CBS Outdoors, who manages Phoenix’s bus shelter ads, to have 50 ads put up advertising his gun training company. The ads read “Guns Save Lives” and “Educate Your Kids,” and also contained smaller text about gun rights and Arizona’s concealed carry law. The signs went up on October 12th. A week later, Phoenix city officials decided the ads didn’t meet a requirement that such ads provide “adequate notice” of a commercial transaction, and the next day, the ads were gone. Korwin sued and lost . . .

But he later appealed and the case will appear before the Arizona Court of Appeals in about a week. Korwin’s contention is that the city is basically using the ad requirement as a form of soft censorship to deny ads they don’t approve of, in this case the pro-gun message, and that their enforcement is arbitrary and capricious. It’s more of a First Amendment issue than a Second, unless they did it because they don’t like guns, which they’ll never admit. Guard your rights jealously from even the slightest incursion.

Word is coming out of Colorado that the signature drive to recall State Senator Evie Hudak is in good shape, and just needs a few more signatures until they’re comfortable. The effort requires 18,900 signatures and today Mike McAlpine, the organizer of the recall effort, said that the effort is “at about 92% of where we need to be.” In a later interview, McAlpine said that 92% figure included a “modified overgoal,” which means that the recall campaign set an internal goal over and above the 18.9k required by law. If history is a guide, there will certainly be a court challenge to the validity of some or all of the signatures, and having a margin of error helps ensure that the effort will not fail if some of the signatures are thrown out.

The Connecticut law that went into effect on October 1 that requires CT residents to have a specific $35 permit in order to buy ammunition in the state has caused quite a stir among fall hunters, many of whom were unaware of the new rule until they were on their way to their hunting trip and stopped to buy ammo only to be turned away. Some hunters, who were hunting in another state anyway just waited until they were out of CT to buy their ammo, but some out-of-state retailers wouldn’t sell to them either. L.L. Bean, which has stores scattered all over the northeast, didn’t sell to any CT residents without a certificate, in state or out, for at least a week following the passage of the law, even though the law does not apply outside the state of Connecticut. theday.com reports that CT officials have only issued 1080 certificates as of last week. Connecticut has a population of 3,590,347 according to Wikipedia. I realize not everyone in the state is a gun owner, but somehow I think the total is more than 0.03% of the population. [Update: According to Pascal, there are some 800,000 registered gun owners in the state. Having a gun permit means you don’t have to have the separate ammo permit.]

An Illinois state representative, Jack Franks (D), has filed a bill to remove the requirement for young adults ages 18-21 to have their parents’ written permission to obtain an Illinois FOID. Under the current law, residents ages 18-21 have to produce a notarized statement from a parent or guardian, who themselves cannot be ineligible for an FOID. Franks called the extra burden unnecessary and an impediment to law-abiding citizens exercising their Second Amendment rights that does nothing to keep criminals from obtaining guns. Franks says he anticipates pushback when the bill is taken up, which could be as early as January.

In the spirit of the conversation earlier about the misnamed Sure-Draw GLOCK Safety (should be Sure-Holster, in my opinion), here’s a video that MattV2099 did about a week ago on request, firing his GLOCK-brand GLOCK. As he says, “Don’t try this at home, if you’re a wuss.”

.

comments

  1. avatar 505markf says:

    Wait a damn minute! An Illinois DEMOCRAT filed a bill in FAVOR of gun rights? I am afraid to turn around to find out that I am not where I thought I was…

    1. avatar JeffR says:

      The concealed carry law was led by a downstate Democrat. Local politics do not always follow the lead of national politics.

    2. avatar Avid Reader says:

      He’s from a county that’s well outside of Chicago in northern Illinois. So he’s probably not dependent on the machine, and has a fairly conservative constituency. Once you get away from Chicago and St.Louis the state is pretty pro 2A.

    3. avatar Oddux says:

      Many democrats are starting to wake up to the fact that self defense is a personal right and can guard their right to their own body against criminals, something the police cannot do. That’s usually the best tack to take with liberals when discussing 2A, given that rape is a serious issue to most liberals.

      I’m finding more and more democrats are on board with self defense. Even if the defense against tyranny arguments still make them awfully uneasy.

      1. avatar Steve Case says:

        No they are not. They’re waking up to the fact that if they trample our rights they’ll soon be out of a job. It has nothing to do with understanding the wishes of their constituents, only their own self preservation.

        1. avatar Jus Bill says:

          Nailed it! Selfishness all the way.

  2. avatar OODAloop says:

    Where I’m from, CQB firearms training includes exactly what MattV2099 did. If your defensive handgun class doesn’t include 0-21 ft training (including holding the slide while shooting to prevent pushing the slide out of battery), don’t you think you missed out on something?

    1. avatar Hannibal says:

      It’s a technique that is so rarely useful in defensive shootings I’m not sure it’s worth teaching. Might be better to just train people to keep their hands, thumbs and noses away from the slide when firing. I can just see someone not remembering when they’re supposed to do what because they’ve been trained in all these high-speed, low-drag contact shooting scenarios that they block the slide and then look really stupid when their (one) shot doesn’t disable an attacker.

      Course, you old just be like me and use a revolver or a semi with a really stiff spring that doesn’t easily go out of battery.

  3. avatar MiketheHopsFarmer says:

    So is that called ‘slide no-bite’?

    1. avatar Marcus Aurelius says:

      Slide muzzling? wait…that could get confusing.

  4. avatar Excedrine says:

    Your days are numbered, Hudak.

    Another one bites the dust, and the civilian disarmament industry browns its collective pants once again. When, not if, but when Colorado goes 3-for-3 in ousting genuinely stupid people from office, it may just set up a genuinely awesome trend for the rest of the nation and actually give Statist thugs elsewhere some pause. For once.

    1. avatar Pascal says:

      I would like to believe you are right, but that is not the way they see it.

      They see it as an isolated problem — don’t underestimate ego. The real test is 2014 and 2016.

    2. avatar Bob says:

      If I Recall Correctly (IIRC), once they have removed this third crazy Democrat and replaced her with a Republican, then the Dems will no longer have a majority in their state Senate. Then they can pass a bill repealing the bad gun control laws those three helped create. Can I get a resident of Colorado to confirm or deny that, please?

      THAT would shake up the CDIC (civilian disarmament industrial complex) pretty hard, wouldn’t it?

      1. avatar Matt in FL says:

        I’m not a CO resident, but you’re correct. Replacing Hudak with an R will make the Senate swing from a one seat D majority to a one seat R majority.

        1. avatar Avid Reader says:

          I am a Colorado resident, but not in her district. Matt in FL is correct. Which means that if we make it to the actual recall stage, you can expect to see a lot of national Dem money fighting it in the courts and in the campaigns. They don’t want to risk losing the Senate here, as they currently have a lock on both houses of the legislature and the governor’s seat.

          However, even if she loses and the Senate passes a bill to repeal those crappy laws, it’s unlikely it would pass the House or that the governor would sign it.

          Complicating the issue for Hudak is the fact that if it does go to election, the party would prefer that she step aside and let a more “electable” Democrat take her place in hopes of saving the seat. So far she’s shown no inclination to do so. She’s a creature of the teacher’s union, and I’m betting she hopes they’ll bail her out.

        2. avatar SteveInCO says:

          On the other hand there are rumors that she is willing to step aside IF the new president of the senate (new president–bwahahaha, suck it John Morse) makes a certain promise.

          You see Hudak is chaircritter of the Senate’s education committee, but the ranking democrud, who would normally replace her, is NOT a shill of the teachers’ union, far from it, he is pro reforms. Hudak is supposedly willing to step down if the new senate president (bwahahaha suck it John Morse) promises to promote another union shill to the chairmanship over this guy’s head–should the recall get enough signatures to go forward.

  5. avatar tdiinva says:

    I’d like to see him try that with a G20 or G21.

    1. avatar Erik says:

      My thoughts exactly

    2. avatar Renegade Dave says:

      a 45 has 2/3rds the chamber pressure of a 9MM and a projectile nearly 2x the weight with a more massive slide. A G21 doesn’t seem like it would be any worse to do that with than a G19. I would agree that a G22/G20 would probably be more robust.

  6. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

    Gee, I almost feel sorry for a whole lotta Fudds in CT.
    And I actually applaud out of state stores not selling to them. Maybe, just maybe, this will heighten awareness?

    I encourage everybody to contribute to the recall Hudak cause.
    I liken it to some words a couple hundred years ago. Something to the affect, all hanging together or we’ll all hang separately…

    1. avatar Anon in CT says:

      Not even close – they earned it through inaction.

      Of course, those of us crazy nuts with Pistol Carry Permits aren’t affected. Just the peaceloving hunters with their un-assaulty rifles and shotties.

  7. avatar Ralph says:

    Evie Hudak from Queens, NY has never been all that popular, winning by a bare majority the first time she ran and by a plurality the second time, edging out the Republican by a grand 342 votes.

    She is New York City scum. I’m hoping that her time is up and that the people of Colorado aren’t “recalled out.”

    1. avatar Avid Reader says:

      She was another that eked out a victory because of a third party candidate siphoning support away from her Republican opponent.

      1. avatar greatUnknown says:

        And how likely is it that the “third-party” candidate was a shill for the Democrats?

    2. avatar SteveInCO says:

      She is in a different media market than Morse and Giron were in. I suspect people here (in the Morse/Giron market) are sick to death of recalls, but the Denver area? Maybe not.

      1. avatar Diamondback says:

        Go here to support the Hudak Recall Campaign please:

        http://www.recallhudaktoo.org

        Thank you.

        Those of us in the Morse and Giron districts are THRILLED that our recalls were successful and want the Hudak recall to be also.

        Please help if you can.

        Thanks a billion.

  8. avatar Ing says:

    Ah, Connecticut. There but for the grace of God…

    1. avatar DavidT says:

      I escaped ten years ago and don’t even like going back for business. I went north two states and settled in NH, much nicer way of life, nicer people too.

  9. avatar C says:

    Good. Make the Fudds hurt. Maybe it will get them off of their dead asses.

    1. avatar Pascal says:

      Still today, so many have no clue. When you can walk into Wal-Mart and see all the display cases filled to the brim with shotgun shells, you know these guys are still clueless. I only hope that they finally get pissed off to do something about it, but I still shake my head every time I talk to a Fudd!

      1. avatar SteveInCO says:

        I don’t seem to know any Fudds. I do work with an avid skeet/trap shooter, but he ain’t no Fudd; that’s for sure, he’s a “Molon Labe”/”Cold Dead Hands” type, i.e., the correct type.

      2. avatar SteveInCO says:

        Oh and at the absolute height of the ammo shortage (really an ammo run), the shotshells were gone too. (I was trying to find a load that would cycle a certain semiauto without being full-on 00 buck which is rather painful, since it has a metal buttplate–and no I can’t find a rubber one that fits.)

      3. avatar Alex Peters says:

        Personally, I always thought the best part of that Draconian CT law was the ammo certificate. Why? Because it was bound to piss off the Fudds and bring them into the opposition camp. Taking away their ammo is akin to taking away their shotguns. They don’t like that very much. So, better late than never.

      4. avatar Jus Bill says:

        Pass the popcorn. Next year is going to be interesting.

  10. avatar Pascal says:

    @Matt in FL:

    There are some 800,000 registered gun owners soon to be more because instead of dealing with the ammo registration BS many are getting a Full Permit. I have done more safety classes this year than I ever have.

    1. avatar Matt in FL says:

      Thanks. I knew it had to be a lot, and I did some looking around to find a number, but couldn’t come up with one, so I just based against population.

    2. avatar Model 31 says:

      Perhaps if the 800,000 gun owners were engaged and voting, they wouldn’t need to be “registered” gun owners that need a permit to purchase…

      1. avatar Jus Bill says:

        Patience, grasshopper…

  11. avatar Steve says:

    “has caused quite a stir among fall hunters, ”

    About time the Fudds realize it’s a fight for them to partake in as well.

  12. avatar bobby b says:

    I’m picking up on the idea that I should already know this, but . . .

    WHY would one want to hold the slide closed?

    1. avatar C says:

      To keep the gun in battery if your antagonist is so close that the muzzle is pressed against him.

      1. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

        Or to not leave brass behind….

    2. avatar vioshi says:

      Is there a way to do this on a gun with a hammer, thinking 1911?

      1. avatar David PA/NJ says:

        I guess you could try pinching the cocking serrations and seeing if you can hold on? Good luck on a 45 though my friend

        1. avatar Roscoe says:

          Laugh!

      2. avatar greatUnknown says:

        Wouldn’t blocking the hammer, especially with forward pressure, prevent the gun from firing?

  13. avatar Hannibal says:

    I like the way this Alan Korwin thinks…

  14. avatar emfourty gasmask says:

    I see those guns save lives posters all the time around here 😮 didn’t know there was a legal challenge

  15. avatar Vhyrus says:

    I saw one of those very ads in northern phoenix not more than a week ago, so either they missed one or there is more to this story than is being reported.

    1. avatar Matt in FL says:

      Hm, I dunno. I just had the one story. Was the one you saw inside the city limits? If not, maybe they only have jurisdiction over some of them, or maybe he did the ad buy both inside and outside the city, and it was only the city officials that acted capriciously.

      1. avatar anon says:

        I’ve seen at least three, noticed the first one several weeks ago, and they are all within Phoenix city limits.

      2. avatar Emfourty Gasmask says:

        There is one up at 19th and Northern I believe.. Or Glendale. Somewhere in that area. I’ve seen alot of them though.

  16. avatar Skyler says:

    So in Illinois an 18-21 year needs a permission slip from mommy? I can undstand people wanting extra scrutiny of younger adults (without agreeing with them of course) but I don’t get where the parents should have special powers over these adults.

    But since Obama has declared people to be children until age 26 then I guess we wil be destined to have perpetual children.

    1. avatar Matt in FL says:

      Well, the part that got me is that the parent has to be FOID eligible, too. That could suck for some people. Set aside the fact that an 18-21 year old shouldn’t have to get mom’s permission to begin with, but let’s say this was a kid whose parents had a checkered past, but the kid was trying to do it right. They still want to defend themselves/hunt/recreate, but they can’t because mom or dad (who they may not even live with) can’t legally possess a gun? That’s messed up. That’s literally “visiting the sins of the father on the son,” and last I checked, we didn’t do that in this country.

      1. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

        Or, what about children in foster homes, you can’t own a weapon simply because you had no legal guardian as a child?

        Or, what if you are not from that state originally? You move there at 18, from Wisconsin to attend school, but you can’t get a weapon because your parents are not from the state of Illinois?

        The entire idea is absurd, at best.

        1. avatar WI Dave says:

          What is really absurd is anyone from Wisconsin willingly moving to Illinois 😀

    2. avatar ExNuke says:

      We have had perpetual children for years and years. They are called Liberals.

  17. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

    “Jack Franks (D), has filed a bill to remove the requirement for young adults ages 18-21 to have their parents’ written permission to obtain an Illinois FOID. Under the current law, residents ages 18-21 have to produce a notarized statement from a parent or guardian, who themselves cannot be ineligible for an FOID.”

    Name one f^cking thing you have to obtain a parent’s written permission for at 18-21, except for this nonsense gun law?

    Can we please stop treating young adults like children, it’s crippling our youth.

    At 21 I was in the military, already served a full deployment, had my own apartment, owned two vehicles, was married, and my wife was pregnant with my first child- why the hell would I need a parents permission to get a gun?

    Once someone is 18, they’re an adult, do not pass go, do not collect $200, it time to act like one, and for everyone else to treat them like one.

    1. avatar SteveInCO says:

      It is time for them to start acting like one…

      Doesn’t sound like this applies to you, but I am sure you know all too many who fail this half of the equation. I don’t think this is something inherent to being 18 however; I think our society is artificially prolonging childhood. (I hear far too many stories of 18th and 19th century American “teenagers” striking out on their own and doing well, everyone from Franklin to Edison.)

  18. avatar Duke of Sharon says:

    “It’s more of a First Amendment issue than a Second,”

    Legally perhaps, but morally and practically there is no difference. We have not many liberties but one Liberty. If the government can eliminate one significant aspect of Liberty then it can destroy all Liberty, even without touching it directly.

    1. avatar SteveInCO says:

      +1 godzillion.

      If they can restrict the first amendment’s speech protections but not the second (say), they can ban gun ads, this site, any sort of advocacy for gun rights, etc., etc., et endless cetera.

      And of course I don’t have to explain to THIS crowd what can happen to the first when the second is toast.

  19. avatar Narcoossee says:

    On a slight tangent, I find it astounding that the rights of 18-21 year olds are being routinely trampled upon.

    Funny…we as a country have no problem sending them off to war, and entrusting them with any number of highly expensive and dangerous weaponry…but here in the USA, they’re not “adult enough”.

    1. avatar neiowa says:

      Here’s an idea. FOLLOW THE CONSTITUTION. Must be 21 to vote.

      Franchise at 18 is yet ONE MORE moronic progressive wet dream. And they were strategically correct. As a group 18-21 are too stupid to vote. For evidence see every dem President electioned since WWII.

      1. avatar Matt in FL says:

        Actually, what’s really interesting about that is when it was written and set at 21, kids were routinely married and out of the house long before that. Now they stay at home ’til (or past) 21, but get to vote at 18. It’s a complete reversal of the situation.

  20. avatar Anonymous says:

    Hudak is the spawn of the devil. I couldn’t believe she was unswayed by the rape victim’s testimony. How could she (Hudak) continue on with the notion that disarming women is going to protect them – let alone insinuate such to a rape victim. Basically she was saying… your being raped is worth it (worth the existence of this kind of gun control). Amazing. I hope she is recalled and never serves a public office again.

    “The issue escalated Monday after state Sen. Evie Hudak, a Westminster Democrat, told Amanda Collins, a college rape victim who testified against the bill, that even if she were armed the night of her attack, odds are she would not have stopped her rapist.”

    What a crock of garbage. A gun is not going to stop a rapist??? Total delusional opinion stacked on lies.

    here:
    http://www.denverpost.com/ci_22733244/colorado-sen-evie-hudaks-concealed-carry-stats-dont

  21. avatar Anonymous says:

    The ammo permit law is ridiculous and unconstitutional. The people of CT should challenge this. Its like… well you have the right to keep and bear arms… but we are going to permit you the ability to fire them. It is a technicality that undermines the purpose of the second amendment.

    It is equivalent to stating… you have the right to free speech and free press but we are going to permit you the ability to say certain things. Just ridiculous. I can’t believe the people of CT are allowing this.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email