I’ve provided an editorial correction to a Politico headline.

President Joe Biden will formally announce the new office Friday during a Rose Garden event where several advocates and lawmakers have been invited to attend.

Harris, who has played a leading role in gun safety policy, will oversee the office, according to a White House statement. Longtime Biden aide Stefanie Feldman, who has worked on gun policy for more than a decade, will serve as its director.

“The new Office of Gun Violence Prevention will play a critical role in implementing President Biden’s and my efforts to reduce violence to the fullest extent under the law, while also engaging and encouraging Congressional leaders, state and local leaders, and advocates to come together to build upon the meaningful progress that we have made to save lives,” the vice president said in a statement.

“Our promise to the American people is this: we will not stop working to end the epidemic of gun violence in every community, because we do not have a moment, nor a life to spare,” she said.

Greg Jackson, executive director of the Community Justice Action Fund, and Rob Wilcox, the senior director for federal government affairs at Everytown for Gun Safety, will report to Feldman as deputy directors of the new office.

For years, gun groups have pleaded with Biden to take this action, which advocates see as a concrete step forward as gun safety legislation remains stalled in Congress. Activists have argued that such an office will help the administration coordinate on gun policy issues across the federal government, while also allowing the White House to show leadership on the issue.

I suspect Harris will be as effective in this role as she has been as Border Czarina.

Contempt of Court?

New Mexico Governor Grisham is following the traditional Democrat playbook and engaging in massive resistance to the federal court’s injunction prohibiting her from enforcing or attempting to enforce her facially unconstitutional ban on the carrying of firearms in Albuquerque and Bernadillo County. She announced that she is amending her executive order so that is only applies to parks and playgrounds.

However, the judge’s order states—

In addition, Defendants are ENJOINED from applying, enforcing, or attempting to enforce, either criminally or civilly, Section (4) of the New Mexico Department of Health’s ‘Public Health Emergency Order Imposing Temporary Firearm Restrictions, Drug Monitoring and Other Public Safety Measures’ to the extent it imposes additional restrictions on the carrying or possession of firearms that were not already in place prior to its issuance.

Because the ban on carrying in parks and playground did not exist prior to the issuance of the executive order, reinstating it appears to be an explicit violation of the injunction.

The Times They Are A-Changin’

Fox News is reporting Illinois Gov. Pritzker has signed a law banning firearms advertising that “officials” believe appeals to children. The law, which also applies to ads aimed at militants or others who might later use the weapons illegally, allows for lawsuits against firearms manufacturers or distributors.

I remember seeing this ad in Boy’s Life back in the early ’60s.Once upon a time, boys were trusted with firearms. My father protected his family’s livestock from feral dogs with a .30/06 while he was in his teens. I dispatched varmints with a .22.

BTW, I still have my Nylon 66.It’s provided decades of plinking pleasure and put small game on my dinner table.

A Civil Rights Victory

Judge Robert E. Payne of the US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia granted the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment today in Fraser, et al. v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives, et al. He found that the prohibition on 18-to-20-year-olds buying handguns violates the Second Amendment and “cannot stand.”

The motion for summary judgment asks for the relief sought in the complaint. The complaint include this among the relief sought:

Declare that 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(b)(1), (c) and any derivative regulations, such as 27 C.F.R. §§ 478.99(b)(1), 478.124(a), 478.96(b), violate the right to keep and bear arms as secured by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Declare that 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(b)(1), (c) and any derivative regulations, such as 27 C.F.R. §§ 478.99(b)(1), 478.124(a), 478.96(b), violate the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution by denying equal protection of the laws to law- abiding, qualified adults between eighteen and twenty years of age.

Permanently enjoin the federal Defendants, their officers, agents, servants, employees, and all persons in active concert or participation with them from enforcing 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(b)(1), (c) and any derivative regulations, such as 27 C.F.R. §§ 478.99(b)(1), 478.124(a), 478.96(b), and provide such further declaratory relief as is consistent with the injunction.

Fraser is suing on behalf of himself and others similarly situated as a class. IANAL, but this looks like a nationwide order to me. I expect the DoJ to have an appeal filed with the Fourth Circuit very quickly.

UPDATE—A family history note … When my son turned 21, he didn’t go to a bar for a drink. He went to a gun store and bought a .45.

UPDATE 2—A lawyer who has reviewed a separate order issued by the judge tells me that the parties in the case have been told to confer on “how best to proceed with the question of class certification in this matter,” so the injunction against enforcement of the purchase restriction may only apply purchases by John Fraser.

UPDATE 3—It’s alway nice to make Twitchy.

That Pesky Bill of Rights

Those first ten amendments to the Constitution keep getting in the way of Our Betters controlling our lives for us. In the early 20th Century, Progressive managed to amend the Constitution to advance their policies. They gave us the income tax and Prohibition, and only one of those mistakes has been corrected.

Now that the Supreme Court has affirmed that the Second Amendment means what it says, Progressives are seeing their gun control agenda swirling down the drain as most lower courts begin overturning infringing laws and regulations. We’re in for a series of blue state legislative hissy fits passing patently unconstitutional laws which the courts will overturn. The next few years will be messing ins states like Maryland.

It’s been suggested Progressives should try to repeal the Second Amendment, but their likelihood of success is very low. Amending the Constitution require approval by 3/4 of the states, and now that Nebraska has become the 27th state to have recognized constitutional carry, the majority of the states are on record supporting that portion of the Bill of Rights.

Everything is proceeding as I have foreseen.

A Civil Rights Victory

Judge Stephen McGlynn has issued a preliminary injunction in Harrel v. Rauol preventing Illinois from enforcing its laws banning “assault weapons” and standard capacity magazines. You can read the judge’s order here.

Here’s the money quote from the order—

Whether well-intentioned, brilliant, or arrogant, no state may enact a law that denies its citizens rights that the Constitution guarantees them. Even legislation that may enjoy the support of a majority of its citizens must fail if it violates the constitutional rights of fellow citizens.

Meanwhile, we are still waiting for the Fourth Circuit to correct its ruling affirming Maryland’s similar bans. The Supreme Court reversed and remanded Bianchi v. Frosh last June, new oral arguments were heard last December, but the Court of Appeal still has not published a new opinion.

Civil Rights in the “Free State”

At the end of June, 2022, the Supreme Court struck down New York’s may-issue handgun permitting system in NYSRPA v. Bruen. On the basis of that decision, the Court reversed and remanded the Fourth Circuit’s upholding of Maryland’s “assault weapons” ban.

The Court of Appeals heard oral arguments on the case on 6 December. Almost five months have passed without a decision. Meanwhile, the Maryland Legislature has responded to Bruen with another round of patently unconstitutional gun control legislation.

When Seconds Count, …

… the police are only minutes away.

The Nashville Metro Police officers who responded to yesterday’s school shooting didn’t waste any time. They responded as quickly as they could, moved into the building even though they had come under fire while still in the parking lot, and took out the shooter. But 14 minutes elapsed between the 911 call and the killer being killed.

We need to adopt a more robust way to protect our children.

I’m Not Making This Up, You Know

Shortly after overturning New York’s handgun carry permit system in the Bruen decision, the Supreme Court vacated the Fourth Circuit’s ruling upholding Maryland’s “assault weapons” ban and remanded that case for retooling in light of Bruen.

Maryland is now arguing that the AR15 is not in common use for self-defense because shots are rarely fired.

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

This was the ninth episode of Blogsmoke. It first ran nine years ago today.

* * * * *




ANNOUNCER: (VOICE OVER MUSIC) Around Twitter Town and in the territory of the net—there’s just one way to handle the harassers and the stalkers—and that’s with an Internet Sheriff and the smell of “BLOGSMOKE”!


ANNOUNCER: “BLOGSMOKE” starring W. J. J. Hoge. The story of the trolling that moved into the young Internet—and the story of a man who moved against it. (MUSIC: OUT)

JOHN: I’m that man, John Hoge, Internet Sheriff—the first man they look for and the last they want to meet. It’s a chancy job—and it makes a man watchful … and a little lonely.


Fighting With Hammers

I have a reasonable array of hammers to use if I had to deal with someone breaking into Stately Hoge Manor. The most obvious are three heavy ones, all well-used Craftsman tools—a 2-lb machinist’s, a 4-lb demolition, and a 9-lb sledge.

However, I’d probably use the Wilson stainless Commander hammer on one of my .45s instead.

I’m Not Making This Up, You Know


My rifle chambered in .17 Remington fires a 25 grain bullet with a muzzle velocity just over 4,000 ft/s. Now, my AR-15 is chambered for 7.62x39mm (It’s a long story), but I doubt that it launches one of the 123 grain bullets in the Hornady ammo I use for deer hunting at 20,000 ft/s. That would result in a muzzle energy over 100,000 ft•lb. which about 8 X the muzzle energy of a round fired from a .50 cal. M2 machine gun. My AR doesn’t seem to kick that hard.

UPDATE—FWIW, the typical muzzle velocity of a bullet fired from an AR-15 chambered for common 5.56x45mm ammunition is about 3,150 ft/s. The only combination of firearms and ammunition that I can find in my gun safe and ammo locker that could produce a muzzle velocity as low as 625 ft/s (1/5 of 3,150) would be a short-barreled revolver loaded with .22 Shorts or a muzzle-loading rifle with a dangerously low powder charge.

No, Joe, They Won’t Need F-15s

Once again, Joe Xiden has threatened to use the regular forces of the U.S. military against citizens who might actively resist one or more of his unconstitutional or illegal acts. Speaking in Pennsylvania today, he called for a federal ban on so-called “assault weapons.” Of course, the Supreme Court has just reversed and remanded the appeals court decision upholding Maryland’s “assault weapons” ban, but that hasn’t dulled Xiden’s lust for unconstitutional federal legislation.

Xiden also said—

You can’t go out and buy an automatic weapon, you can’t go out and buy a cannon, and for those brave right wing Americans who say its all about keeping America independent and safe, if you want to fight against the country you need an F-15. You need something a little more than a gun.

There are so many false statements there. You can go out and buy and automatic weapon. It has to be one that’s in the current registry of such weapons (over 150,000 such weapons are registered), you have to pass a background check, and you have to pay for a $200 tax stamp, but you can buy one. It’s also legal to buy a cannon. The process is similar to buying a machine gun.

IIRC, the last time veteran’s took up arms against a government, it was a local government, and the trigger for that action was a stolen election. You can read about The Battle of Athens here.

And finally, Xiden might want to think about how ragtag group of peasants with small arms handled modern armies and air forces in Afghanistan during the last four decades.

Civil Rights Update

This has appeared on the docket of Bianchi v. Frosh, the Maryland “Assault Weapons” Ban case. The Fourth Circuit had previously upheld the ban; the Supreme Court reversed and remanded the case for reconsideration in light of the recent Bruen case.

The court directs supplemental briefing as follows:

Supplemental opening brief due: 08/22/2022
Supplemental response brief due: 09/12/2022
Supplemental reply brief permitted by: 09/22/2022

Stay tuned.

Massive Resistance Redux

The Supreme Court vacated the Ninth Circuit’s decision upholding Hawaii’s restrictive carry permit regime in Young v. Hawaii and remanded the case for reconsideration in light of Bruen. Young filed a motion for summary reversal with the Ninth Circuit, and Hawaii has filed a motion seeking to delay the inevitable.

It looks as if the Democrats plan to engage in the same sort of massive resistance to the expansion of civil rights as they did in the ’60s.

The Futility of Gun Control

This is from NPR‘s report on the Abe assassination in Japan this morning—

Public television NHK aired a dramatic video of Abe giving a speech outside a train station in the western city of Nara. He is standing, dressed in a navy blue suit, raising his fist, when two gunshots are heard. The video then shows Abe collapsed on the street, with security guards running toward him. He holds his chest, his shirt smeared with blood.

In the next moment, security guards leap on top of a man in gray shirt who lies face down on the pavement. A double-barreled device that appeared to be a handmade gun is seen on the ground.

Japan has some of the strictest gun control laws in the world.

A Civil Rights Update

Governor Larry Hogan has directed the Maryland State Police to suspend use of the “good and substantial reason” requirement for a “Wear and Carry” permit previously used to suppress most citizens’ ability to exercise Second Amendment rights outside of their homes. This is a good first step in bringing Maryland into compliance with the Second Amendment.

Maryland’s “assault weapons” ban was upheld by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, but the Supreme Court has vacated that decision and sent the case back to the Fourth Circuit to be reconsidered in light of Bruen. The Fourth Circuit had previously upheld Maryland’s restrictions on standard capacity magazines, but last week, the Supreme Court overturned California’s and New Jersey’s bans which are more or less the same as Maryland’s

A challenge to Maryland’s Handgun Qualification License (essentially a permit to purchase) is also pending before the Fourth Circuit.

The next few months will bring some interesting decisions at the Fourth Circuit, and I suspect the next session of the Maryland Legislature will bring out campaign of massive resistance to Second Amendment rights from the Democrat majority.

We shall see.

Civil Rights Victories

This is from today’s Order List of the Supreme Court—

Bianchi v. Frosh is the challenge to Maryland’s “assault weapons” ban.

The Court also granted certiorari petitions on the New Jersey and California standard capacity magazine ban cases, vacated the lower courts’ judgments, and sent the cases back to the Third and Ninth Circuits, and the Court granted the certiorari petition the challenge to Hawaii’s carry permit system, vacated the Ninth Circuit’s judgment, returned that case to the circuit court.

Things are proceeding more quickly than I had foreseen.

Clarence Thomas Made My Day

We know of no other constitutional right that an individual may exercise only after demonstrating to government officers some special need. That is not how the First Amendment works when it comes to unpopular speech or the free exercise of religion. It is not how the Sixth Amendment works when it comes to a defendant’s right to confront the witnesses against him. And it is not how the Second Amendment works when it comes to public carry for selfdefense.

NY State Rifle & Pistol Asso. v. Bruen, 20-843, Slip Op., 62, 63 (S. Ct.).

Defects in Red Flag Laws

The obvious objection to most red flag laws is based in the Second Amendment. IANAL, but it seems to me that they also infringe on rights secured by the Fourth Amendment (“The right of the People to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated …”) and the Fifth Amendment (“No person shall be … deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law …”). Don’t firearms count as “effects” or “property”?