Somerset man files NRA-backed suit against the commonwealth – “At issue in the suit — which has drawn the attention of the National Rifle Association — is whether the commonwealth should able to bar individuals for life from possessing, using, controlling, selling, transferring or manufacturing firearms if the person is recommended for an evaluation under Section 302 of the Mental Health Procedures Act. The Somerset man’s situation is that, at age 16, he was suffering from depression brought on by bullying and a relationship break-up. His mother, according to the suit, took him to Somerset Hospital in September of 2011 because she feared he might harm himself. A doctor at the hospital recommended that he be committed under Section 302, but the mother took him home instead.” Keep your eye on this one.
Another challenge to the feds . . . “’They’ve been used as a tool to intimidate the sovereign State of Kansas,’ said Jay Atkin, who came from Kansas City for a federal court hearing in a case that pits state law against federal law. Two Kansans face up to a decade in prison for making and selling silencers without registering them with the federal government or paying the special taxes. They say it’s allowed under state law. But a federal jury says it’s illegal. That jury convicted Jeremy Kettler and Shane Cox on multiple counts of illegally possessing, making and selling the silencers under the National Firearms Act.”
Would guns work in space?
Sure, unless they’re wielded by Imperial Storm Troopers.
Voters’ perceptions of crime continue to conflict with reality – “Despite double-digit percentage decreases in U.S. violent and property crime rates since 2008, most voters say crime has gotten worse during that span, according to a new Pew Research Center survey. The disconnect is nothing new, though: Americans’ perceptions of crime are often at odds with the data.”
“Would guns work in space?”
We beat that dead horse about a year or so back.
Yes, they will work.
The Russians actually had a piece of light artillery on one of their space stations during the cold war.
Guns were (and maybe still are) in the Soyuz survival kits.
*WARNING* Due to the joys of orbital mechanics, when in orbit, what you shoot away from you has a tendency to eventually come back at you…
That’s the least of your problems. If you touch off a round during a spacewalk, you’ll probably spin fast enough to power a lightbulb.
“If you touch off a round during a spacewalk, you’ll probably spin fast enough to power a lightbulb.”
Details.
It’s always those damn details…
Apart from recoil issues (GyroJet, anyone?) there might also be a problem with the lube. As in, the more volatile components will tend to outgas first, leaving goo behind.
The temperature extremes won’t help much either.
As I understand it, there are vacuum-rated lubricants. And as you noted, a temp swing of 500 F has to be dealt with…
Well the Mythbusters addressed guns in space. And their pistol worked pretty well in a vacuum sans oxygen. Maybe Elon Musk will institute some kind of Martian gun control…oh wait Mars will be some kind of millennium for humanity with peace,love and goodwill to men?
According to Total Recall, Babylon 5 and well pretty much every other sci-fi book, movie, and TV show that touches on the topic once Mars is colonized it will be as peaceful as Chicago on a warm summer night…
There was a gun in Martian Chronicles that shoots bees, IIRC.
Powdered Teflon lubricants already exist. They’re cheap and effective. I use them for anything I don’t plan on shooting for awhile because they stop corrosion 100% when properly applied and don’t gather dust the way oils do.
“Guns were (and maybe still are) in the Soyuz survival kits.”
They went back to the 9mm pistol in 2007 because the newest ammo for the TP-82’s shotgun barrels that the Russians had was 21+ years old and deemed unusable due to the fact that manufacture of the 40 gauge shells stopped in 1986.
“the newest ammo for the TP-82’s shotgun barrels that the Russians had was 21+ years old and deemed unusable due to the fact that manufacture of the 40 gauge shells stopped in 1986.”
I don’t buy the old ammo excuse at all.
Fer cripe’s sake, we’re talking Russian sate-owned ammo companies!
They can knock out a few thousand rounds of that propitiatory ammo with relative ease. Just give the damn job to whoever develops their new ammo today…
They probably figured it wasn’t worth the time and effort.
How many Russian Cosmonauts get lost in Siberia these days?
Dow Corning Silicon High Vacuum Grease
Use it ever day, you’ll be fine.
I would be more concerned about the trapped atmospheric pressure in the case pushing the bullet out under rapid pressure drop.
Maybe I’ll test that today.
Do you work at Glenn, or Sandia? (Or just have some vacuum pumps and spare time?)
In answer to your question, nope. Unless the crimp is bad, ‘natch. I tried it with a variety of rounds from .22LR to .50BMG and no measurable leaking after 12 hours (all the time we could ‘borrow’ the tool, it was in a lab).
Well, on an orbital EVA you’re already wearing a very massive spacesuit so a few more pounds of battery wouldn’t hinder a “weightless” astro-grunt very much so I say, “Lasers, FTW!”
Mind, the gun they packed on the Soyuz was not for use in space, but for defense against bears when the capsule comes down in Siberia.
Illegal by Fed law, but legal in the state? Sounds a lot like the recreational marijuana issue
Mary Jane issue, sanctuary city issue….the Feds only prosecute issues they have an adgenda against.
But would the projectile cross state lines?
Maybe, but the report wouldn’t. 🙂
Kansas put a law on the books to make themselves looks tough against the big bad Feds. But when the rubber hit the road, Kansas politicians folded like a cheap suit instead of standing up to the Feds.
Of course they did, because the Confederacy lost. Until Kansas decides to start another Civil War they exist under federal law and case law.
That’s why I roll my eyes whenever I hear some blowhard strutting around signing bills saying the state won’t enforce federal gun laws, or cooperate, etc. Of course not, they’re federal laws. But I guess someone thought those statements had some meaning and will be spending some time in federal clink unless they get a pardon (unlikely).
Not quite. There’s an article for that story https://m.lasvegassun.com/news/2016/nov/21/kansas-mans-homemade-gun-silencers-clash-with-fede/ and in it you see the the Kansas Attorney General intervened in the case to defend the state law. So the politicians weren’t just running away after a bunch of bluster. Sentencing for the case is set for Feb 6th. After which it can be appealed up the chain where the State officials can step in again to defend the state law.
And it can be appealed all the way up to a freshly restocked with a conservative SCOTUS…
I know that the incidence of crime has dropped but it sure seems as though the wantonness and depravity of the criminals has increased.
Honestly I think that’s media deception. As crime has decreased the numbers can’t be blathered about as much in the media so they look for the truly depraved stories for shock value.
If it bleeds, it leads and when there’s less general bloodshed they gotta find bloodier individual stories.
While I agree that one of the reasons that perception is different from reality is probably due media coverage, I don’t think the word ‘deception’ is accurate or fair. They’re trying to drive ratings and people form an opinion from seeing so much doom and gloom in the news. Do you think the media has some vested interest in people believing the crime rate is going up? Doesn’t seem plausible to me. Also, if you believe the media was in on some grand conspiracy against trump, then you’d expect the opposite, no?
Yes, threefold.
1) Blame guns for why the crime rate went up and subconsciously call for more gun control.
2) Try to give government more power to “do something”.
3) Make people scared so they keep turning to the news to get the latest updates thus driving up their ratings.
Can’t we get Nick Leghorn to start a survey company for pro-gun issues? We could call it the Pew Pew Research Center.
This is kind of weird. The majority of Clinton supporters LIVE in the places where crime actually did get worse, yet most think its the same or less. Trump supporters live in flyover country where crime has dropped yet think its gotten worse. Its almost like Trump supporters have empathy for crime affected people who don’t live where they are and Clinton supporters are blind to the suffering their policies cause right in their little liberal fiefdoms…
I hear you. Rumor control (ie, TV) says that out of 5000 counties in the US, Hillary won 300, yet her servants are having fits about how *Trump* is about hate! What I was wondering is the comparison of murders, for example. Can we compare the number of homicides in the 300 counties that she won, to the homicides in the rest of the country? Because I bet I know the result.
“Americans’ perceptions of crime are often at odds with the data.”
That’s easily explained by the fact that the anti-gun politicians and media keep pimping every shooting they can find (unless it’s black-on-black gang violence in Democrat-controlled cities, of course) in an effort to push their agenda.
The hilarious part is that the more they bang that drum, the more they convince fence-sitters that maybe owning a gun for protection from all that crime isn’t a bad idea. It’s not a very good strategy.
They can manipulate perceptions, but they can’t control all the outcomes.
They try to manipulate the outcomes and in some places have varying degrees of success.
1. Beat the drum that Crime is increasing
2. Make legal ownership of firearms more difficult
3. Convince population unable to defend themselves to cede more control to government
(4. Profit…. ha we found the mystery 3d step)
Looking at gun-control heavy localities steps 1-3 are pretty successful if those are the goals.
Crime is on the increase. However, it’s the crime committed by politicians that is on the rise, not the crime committed by the people. That’s the biggest concern I have, maybe the average Trump voter shares that concern. There’s also the situation where “protesters” have become rioters but the authorities and the media won’t call them that. That creates a lot of undocumented crime, as well as actual crime in the form of a lying media and duplicitous mayors and police chiefs. What do you call a rioter who is rioting to influence political thought?
Strictly speaking, duplicitous politicians and a “lying media” aren’t actual instances of crime. Also, I haven’t seen any data on total crime rate. I’ve only ever seen stuff on violent crime (for which the trend has been down since the mid-late 70s, I think). Total crime could be steady/increasing/falling. Who puts out those statistics?
Crime has worsened. homicides have fallen but crimes I would say have worsened. Especially when people give room for them to occur – like room to protest. Room to riot. Is illegal immigration counted in those statistics?
Homicides WERE falling for over a decade. But they’re shooting up (heh) in the last couple years since that whole “room to destroy” thing started.
I’m sure the Brennan Center for Justice will suddenly notice this rise in the crime rate AFTER Obama leaves office and will blame it all on Trump.
To be prohibited from possessing firearms because of mental issues, you must be involuntarily committed for treatment or found by a court to be mentally incompetent. Being committed for observation doesn’t count if they release you without treatment. Voluntarily seeking treatment doesn’t count either. Although the psychiatrist recommended commitment for the Somerset man, that commitment never occurred. Therefore, his gun rights should still be intact.
True for Federal law. But they are talking about state law.
I gather the prohibition is for life. If mental health treatment is completely ineffective, even over several decades, then why does it still exist? Prohibition should be while under treatment, no more, unless an actual crime has actually been committed.
“The disconnect is nothing new, though: Americans’ perceptions of crime are often at odds with the data.”
With the media in full swing cranking up the “White Supremacist” fear factor since Nov. 8, you’d think there would be shortage of white sheets on the market by now.
In the end, it doesn’t matter if crime rates continue to fall if you’re the victim of one of the crimes that do happen.
It may not matter to you personally, but it matters in a greater sense for informing public policy…
Comments are closed.