From FOSSCAD

Happy Black Friday y’all! The OK Boomer 3d printed 1911 is now in open beta at The Gatalog. QR code attached here is a link to the room (you need to make a free account)

r/fosscad - Happy Black Friday y'all! The OK Boomer 3d printed 1911 is now in open beta at The Gatalog (on rocketchat). QR code attached here is a link to the room (you need to make a free account)

r/fosscad - Happy Black Friday y'all! The OK Boomer 3d printed 1911 is now in open beta at The Gatalog (on rocketchat). QR code attached here is a link to the room (you need to make a free account)

r/fosscad - Happy Black Friday y'all! The OK Boomer 3d printed 1911 is now in open beta at The Gatalog (on rocketchat). QR code attached here is a link to the room (you need to make a free account)

Illinois Gun Owners Not Rushing to Register Their Guns Under New Law

Illinois passed a draconian gun control measure last year that, after surviving various legal challenges, has become law.

One of the law’s requirements is that owners of certain kinds of rifles must register them with the state police or risk being arrested. The deadline for registering the guns is January 1, 2024 and let’s just say there’s not a rush to register the firearms.

As of November 21, just 3,439 owners had registered nearly 6,600 guns they owned before those firearms became illegal to possess or sell in Illinois. How many firearms are affected in the state? We know that the registered weapons through November 21 represent less than 0.1% of the 2.4 million firearms in the state.

“We’ll just see how the process continues to work and we’ll share the data as we continue on a daily basis to do so,” Illinois State Police Director Brendan Kelly said during an unrelated event in Springfield.

“I can tell you, at least for me, that I think all of us take our time sometimes when we know the deadline is 2 ½ months (away), that we’ll find the time eventually to go online, which is what they need to do and to register as they’re required to do,” Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker said. That’s true, except there aren’t 2 ½ months before the deadline for registration. There are a little more than five weeks until the deadline.

Chicago Tribune:

People who owned those guns before Jan. 10 but don’t register them with the Illinois State Police by Jan. 1, can be charged with a misdemeanor for a first offense and felonies for subsequent violations.

But earlier this year, some law enforcement officials declared they had no intention of going after those who violate the law. After Pritzker signed the gun ban into law, an estimated 90 of Illinois’ 102 county sheriffs issued letters stating they “believe that (the new gun law) is a clear violation of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution” and that they wouldn’t enforce it.

That’s an amazing stand by the sheriffs, many of whom sent an identical letter to state politicians which states “as the custodian of the jail and chief law enforcement officer” of their county, they will not “be arresting or housing law-abiding individuals that have been arrested solely with noncompliance” with the state’s new ban on some military-style weapons and magazines.”

Many of these sheriffs stood their ground against the unconstitutional COVID restrictions as well. Whether the legal theory they are basing their decision on will stand a Supreme Court remains to be seen.

No one needs an AR-15 for protection

Dear Editor: At the front and center of the debate on firearm possession and use is the AR-15 style weapon, where a line of demarcation has been drawn.

One side wants to own and use those guns publicly. The other side wants them banned publicly and for protection purposes. The AR-15 style weapon is essentially a weapon for war. There is no war in our country. No one needs to have those guns for protection.

I ask myself why proponents for owning a weapon of war deride a ban of those weapons. Is there an invisible war? And I seriously doubt they really believe a second ban of the AR-15 style would just be the beginning of a new assault on the Second Amendment. Nor that 77,000 newly hired IRS agents will be coming to take their guns.

This leaves me to think they just do not want anyone telling them what guns they can have, how they use them or the qualifications for possession.

Public safety and gun laws play second fiddle to unfettered want of individual liberty. I don’t know about you, but it sure seems to me the anarchy movement is alive and well in our country.

Bill Walters
Fitchburg

Homeowner shoots, kills suspect during home-invasion burglary in southern Oregon

SHADY COVE, Ore. – Jackson County Sheriff’s Office detectives are investigating a homicide that occurred Monday night in Shady Cove around 2 a.m.

Dispatch received a call that a homeowner had shot a suspect during a home-invasion burglary in the area of Cleveland Street.

Deputies responded, and Mercy Flights medics attempted life-saving measures.

The suspect was pronounced deceased at 2:34 a.m., the Sheriff’s Office said.

“JCSO detectives are investigating claims of self-defense during the home-invasion burglary,” the Sheriff’s Office stated. “An occupant of the home held a valid protection order against the suspect. There have been no arrests, and all parties are cooperating with the investigation.”

Upon completion of the investigation, detectives will forward the case to the Jackson County District Attorney’s Office for review, the report said.

“Due to the sensitive nature and ongoing investigation, names will not be released at this time,” JCSO stated. “Further information will be released at a later time in coordination with the DA’s Office.”

The Biden Administration is Now Applying its Failed Thinking on Gun Control To Cars

We don’t write about cars much here, but there are some striking parallels to gun control in some recent moves by the Biden administration. Tell me if this rings any bells. Rather than punishing people who do idiotic things with their cars that endanger the public, the National Transportation Safety Board instead wants to punish all drivers with speed-limiting devices.

When we take a closer look at a particular tragedy they’re using to justify the move, we can see that the regulatory authoritarians in the administration apply the same flawed collectivist thinking to virtually every aspect of modern life.

It all started at the beginning of last year in Las Vegas, when a driver ran a red light. That happens all the time, of course, but the feds want us to focus on the speed of the car that ran the light: 103 MPH. The offending Dodge Challenger slammed into a minivan and several other vehicles, killing everyone in the Challenger and the minivan.

One thing the regulators don’t want us to focus on, of course, is the fact that the driver of the vehicle was severely impaired. He had a potent mix of cocaine and PCP in his system, and therefore couldn’t have been anywhere near his right mind when he failed to stop. He also had a long history of previous speeding tickets that Nevada authorities hadn’t taken seriously enough to bother revoking his license.

The NTSB makes a number of recommendations here, but only one of them makes any sense: taking this kind of reckless speeding seriously.

You’d think that someone with a history of driving at those kinds of speeds in a city would be punished with the loss of their license or time behind bars.  You’d be wrong. The jails are apparently already overcrowded with tax cheats, people who carried without permits, druggies, and other non-violent offenders that the state feels are greater threats to society.

Most sane people would agree that people who actually endanger the public should be the state’s first priority, but state bureaucracies don’t seem to be staffed by many sane people.

All of the other NTSB recommendations center around adding an Big Brother-type unwanted gadget to our cars: speed limiting devices. The NTSB says that everyone’s cars should, at minimum, make annoying noises when if we’re speeding, even just a few miles per hour over the posted limit.

But that’s the least intrusive of their proposals. What they’d really rather see is the installation of devices that prevents cars from speeding at all. For people who’ve been cited for low-level speeding offenses — think 10 mph over the limit — they recommend states force interlocks (like DWI interlocks) that actually shut a car down if the driver speeds too much.

If you think about this even a little bit, the logic simply doesn’t pan out. The vast, vast majority of drivers will never drive as fast in a city as the deceased Las Vegas scofflaw did. Even fewer people mess around with cocaine and PCP. Fewer still would ever do all of those things at the same time.

Just as it is with gun control, the government’s default solution isn’t to go after the crackheads and other lawbreakers who drive 100 MPH on city streets. Instead, they want to force everyone to spend thousands of dollars extra when buying a car that will prevent them speeding at all.

Authoritarians and collectivists are incapable of thinking in terms of individual freedoms, or how those who endanger the public — usually with long records of doing exactly that — should be the ones who are punished for it. They’re knee-jerk reaction is always to punish everyone for the stupidity of a few.

For those of us who dare to disagree with the Bidenbots’ approach, the NTSB recommends that we get more “education.” Instead of realizing that they work for the voting public and that we don’t want or need to buy expensive robo-nanny technology for our cars, they think we’re simply too stupid to realize what’s best for us and take our medicine. We’re just too ignorant and are in need of re-education on the benefits of imposing a top-down control system that wouldn’t have stopped the Las Vegas moron from taking coke and PCP before getting behind the wheel.

Tell us if this also rings any bells — the government also wants advertisers to stop telling us that fast cars are cool. A significant segment of the public may like fast cars, but in the eyes of regulators we’re just a bunch of brain-dead idiots who are at the mercy of evil advertisers. If they’d only tell more often that the Chevy Volt is totally cool, we’d be lining up at our local dealers clamoring for them and eagerly reducing our carbon footprint. Right?

As usual, government bureaucrats think there’s no freedom that’s too important to get rid of for the greater good, and that anybody who disagrees with them is too dumb or unsophisticated to know what’s good for them. Just as with guns, it’s not about reducing crimes or public safety, it’s all about control.

November 24

1221 – The forces of Genghis Khan defeats those of Jalal ad-Din Mingburnu, Shah of the Khwarazm Empire at the Battle of the Indus, completing the Mongol conquest of Central Asia.

1642 – Dutch explorer Abel Tasman discovers an island he calls Van Diemen’s Land n honor of the Governor of the Dutch East Indies, which is later renamed Tasmania.

1832 – The South Carolina legislature passes the Ordinance of Nullification, declaring that the Federal import tax Tariffs of 1828 and 1832 that helped New England states but less Southern states, null and void in the state, beginning a political crisis between the state and the federal government that would not be resolved until March of the next year.

1835 – The Texas Provincial Government authorizes the creation of a horse-mounted police force called the Texas Rangers

1859 – Charles Darwin publishes On the Origin of Species.

1877 – Anna Sewell’s novel Black Beauty is published.

1917 – In Milwaukee, 9 members of the Milwaukee Police Department are killed when a bomb – suspected to have been planted by the Galleanist  faction of anarchists – is found at a church and explodes after being taken to the police office, the most deaths in a single event in U.S. police history until the September 11 attacks in 2001.

1943 – Off Tarawa Atoll, the escort carrier USS Liscome Bay is torpedoed by the IJN submarine I-175 and sinks, killing 650 service men, among them PO3 Doris ‘Dorie’ Miller, who was awarded the Navy Cross for actions during the Japanese raid on Pearl Harbor and which Ford Class carrier CVN-81 will be named after.

1944 – The 73rd Bombardment Wing launches the first B-29 bombing attack on Tokyo from the Northern Mariana Islands.

1963 – On live TV, Lee Harvey Oswald, the accused assassin of President John F. Kennedy, is murdered by Jack Ruby in the basement of Dallas police department headquarters.

1969 – The Apollo 12 command module splashes down safely in the Pacific Ocean, ending the second manned mission to land on the Moon.

1971 – During an airline hijacking, a man calling himself Dan Cooper (aka D. B. Cooper) parachutes from a Northwest Orient Airlines plane with $200,000 in ransom money.

1989 – After a week of mass protests against the Communist regime known as the Velvet Revolution, Miloš Jakeš and the entire Politburo of the Czechoslovak Communist Party resign from office, bringing an end to Communist rule in Czechoslovakia.

2016 – The government of Colombia and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia People’s Army  – FARC – sign a revised peace deal, ending the country’s more than 50 year long civil war.

Yeah, the 50% increase in the grocery tab is a figment of my imagination….

Gavin Newsom Implies Inflation Pains Are A Conservative Lie.

California Governor Gavin Newsom (D) implied this week that the inflation pains Americans are feeling this Thanksgiving are simply a lie pushed by conservatives.

“Things you won’t see on Fox News today,” Newsom posted Wednesday on X. “Prices for Thanksgiving are down — from Turkey to air travel.”

Newsom’s post included a chart showing price changes according to Labor Department data. Prices for peas, milk, stuffing, pie crusts, turkey, and cranberries have dropped from last year, according to the chart.

However, inflation is only just cooling off after spiking during the last few years.

Last year, the average price of a Thanksgiving meal hit a record high. While prices of some items have dipped this year from last year’s record highs, prices are still higher than they were before the pandemic.

This year, the average cost of a Thanksgiving meal for 10 people is $61.17, down 4.5% from last year’s $64.05 average cost, according to a report from the American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF).

Continue reading “”

Ruger Follows Up the Marlin Dark Series with the Re-Release of the Marlin Classic Model 1894 Chambered in .357 Magnum

Hot on the heels of the re-release of the Marlin Dark Series, Ruger has just announced the re-release of one of Marlin’s all-time classics, the Model 1894 lever action chambered in .357 Magnum. Unlike the Dark Series guns, the 1894 Classic is, well, a classic. It has blued steel and an American Black Walnut stock with tasteful checkering and a rubber recoil pad.

The new Marlin 1894 sports an 18.63-inch cold hammer forged barrel, an adjustable semi-Buckhorn rear sight, and a hooded brass bead on the front. Capacity is 10 rounds of .357 Magnum or .38 Special loaded into the full-length magazine tube below the barrel.

Overall length is just 36 inches and weight is only 6.2 pounds. Although I don’t see it listed in the specs, it looks like the new 1894 is drilled and tapped for optics mounting as well. It comes with sling swivel studs installed, and an offset hammer spur if you do decide to mount a scope.

The Marlin 1894 in .357 Magnum is probably my all-time favorite lever gun. It’s sleek, fast-handling and packs a good punch for its size. I used the Model 1894 Cowboy in .357 Magnum for years when I was doing Cowboy Action Shooting and got a have of trigger time in behind that gun.

My buddy shot the same model 1894 and there were always a lot of them represented on the line at any match we went to. It’s a heck of a camp and brush gun, too.

Mine has the 24-inch heavy octagonal barrel on it, which I love, but I appreciate the traditional 18-inch carbine as well, so I’m glad to see that being the first 1894 that Ruger is bringing back into the Marlin line.

There’s still a lot of merit to matching up your lever gun to a handgun of the same caliber when it comes to general utility or range and field use, so if you’re a .357 Magnum fan you should be excited to see the comeback of the classic Model 1894.

Specifications

Caliber: .357 Magnum/.38 Special
Capacity: 10+1
Stock: American Black Walnut
Material: Alloy Steel
Finish: Satin Blued
Front Sight: Brass Bead with Hood
Rear Sight: Adjustable Semi-Buckhorn
Weight: 6.2 lb.
Overall Length: 36″
Length of Pull: 13.63″
Barrel Length: 18.63″
Barrel: Cold Hammer-Forged Alloy Steel
Twist: 1:16″ RH
Grooves: 6
MSRP: $1,239

Welcome to reality.

Taking a trip to the firing range was something I’d never do before October 7

Amy Klein - Mira Zaki

Amy Klein is a journalist and author who is working on a book about older motherhood.

I’ve seen plenty of gun ranges on TV and movie screens, but nothing comes close to the ear-splitting BOOM BOOM BOOM that’s making my soul shake despite my soundproof headphones — which are not so soundproof after all.

So I step out of the double doors — one can’t open till the other closes — to get earplugs to wear under the headphones. I put my clear plastic goggles back on and reenter the smoky range to learn how to shoot a gun.

Anyone who knows anything about me knows I’m a card-carrying liberal feminist, one who won’t even watch violent movies. I don’t believe private citizens should be armed — least of all because as a parent I know that guns were the leading cause of death among children and teens in 2020 and 2021, according to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

And yet.

With antisemitism reaching what the FBI deems a “historic level,” threats against Jewish students on campus proliferating at universities and massive anti-Israel demonstrations taking place around the world, it’s enough to make any Jew feel scared. In my own uptown New York City neighborhood, I know of a few people who have been attacked when arguing with people tearing down Israeli hostage posters, including the head of a Krav Maga studio.

That’s how I found myself at Gun for Hire, a gun range and club in New Jersey, to learn how to shoot. I wanted to confront the question: Could my fear of violence against Jews outweigh my distrust of firearms?

‘You should be prepared’

The first time I ever met religious Jews who owned guns was in 2021; I was driving from New York City to Long Island and heard AM radio ads for shooting ranges there. “Isn’t that funny? It’s like another country,” I had mentioned to my Long Island friends at a party. “I own a gun,” one friend said, “I have two!” said another, a nervous Woody Allen type of guy I wouldn’t trust with a Nerf gun. I’d chalked that up to a couple of outliers but told my husband we’d have to ask people if they had a gun in the house before we accepted a Shabbat dinner invitation on Long Island with our kid.

That was then; this is now.

Continue reading “”

A Reversal in Rahimi Will Be Tougher to Write Than Critics Admit
Courts are “not insensitive to domestic violence” but are “sensitive to the constitutional rights of the accused.

The conventional wisdom is that the Supreme Court will certainly reverse the Fifth Circuit in Rahimi. Indeed I’ve voiced that position myself several times, especially in light of a potential grant in Range. (The New York Times picked up Justice Barrett’s question). But let me challenge that conventional wisdom: an opinion reversing Rahimi will be tougher to write than most critics will admit.

Let’s start with a premise: Rahimi was a faithful application of Bruen. Efforts to “clarify” Bruen are really an attempt to rewrite the precedent. I don’t think anyone seriously doubts this premise. Now the reason why the Court may “clarify” Bruen is because certain members of the Court don’t like the results that it yields: namely, that a dangerous person like Rahimi can possess a firearm. Again, the correctness of the Bruen precedent should be able to stand without regard to how it may be applied in future cases. But that’s where we are. Some members of the Court who profess to be originalists are still motivated by consequentialism. And these concerns came out loud and clear during oral argument.

Still, there is a long time between November and June. A majority opinion has to be written. And that opinion will have to navigate an issue that didn’t get much attention during oral argument: what other constitutional rights should dangerous people lose? Certainly this case can’t just be about guns.

One of my first published articles, The Constitutionality of Social Cost, was published in the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy in 2011. I had started thinking about the topic in 2009, before McDonald v. Chicago was decided. The basic premise of my article was that there are many dangerous rights, and the Second Amendment was not an outlier. Here is a snippet from the introduction:

Although the Second Amendment has been singled out from its brethren in the Bill of Rights as the most dangerous right, it is not the only dangerous right. The Supreme Court has developed over a century of jurisprudence to deal with forms of liberty that yield negative externalities.

The right to speak freely is balanced with the possible harm that can result from people preaching hate, violence, intolerance, and even fomenting revolution. The freedom of the press permits the media to report on matters that may harm national security. The freedom of association allows people to congregate to advocate for certain types of violence.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures enables the possession of the fruits and instrumentalities of crime with impunity. Inculpatory evidence seized in violation of this right is generally inadmissible during trial, permitting crimes to go unpunished.

Likewise, a violation of a person’s Miranda rights renders certain confessions—even an uncoerced inculpatory confession—inadmissible. Procedural rights during the criminal trial—including the right to grand jury indictment, the right against self‐incrimination, the right against double jeopardy, the right of compulsory process, the right of confrontation, the right of a speedy and public trial, and the right of trial by jury—all make the prosecution of culpable defendants significantly harder.

The Due Process Clause, which imposes limitations on all government actions, places the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt on the prosecution. The right to non‐excessive bail and reasonable fines make it easier for suspects to avoid prison during prosecutions and may allow them to abscond before trial.

The right against cruel and unusual punishments removes certain forms of retribution from the quiver of the state, thereby limiting the range of punishments for those found guilty of a crime. The right of habeas corpus ensures that a person—however dangerous—cannot be detained indefinitely without proper procedures.

Liberty’s harm to society takes many forms—not just from the exercise of the right to keep and bear arms. These precedents show how the Court balances freedom and the harm that may result from its exercise. Although a “primary concern of every government [is] a concern for the safety and indeed the lives of its citizens,” this concern is not constitutionally sacrosanct.

Not much has changed since I wrote these words more than a decade ago. The Supreme Court, often with lopsided majorities, protects the constitutional rights of very dangerous people. Yet when it comes to the Second Amendment, it’s as if all of these precedents vanish.

Continue reading “”

November 23

534 BC – Thespis of Icaria becomes the first actor on record to portray a character on stage, and later has the things relating to the acting arts named after him – Thespian. 

1248 –  Troops under King Ferdinand III of Castile conquer Seville during the Reconquista of Spain.

1644 – John Milton publishes Areopagitica, a pamphlet decrying censorship in England

1876 – Tammany Hall leader, William “Boss” Tweed arrives in New York City, under arrest for bribery, contract kickbacks and embezzlement, after being extradited from Spain.

1914 – The last U.S. forces withdraw from Veracruz, Mexico occupied 6 months earlier in response to the Tampico Affair, an incident when U.S. sailors were detained by Mexican forces of General Huerta during the Mexican Revolution.

1924 – Edwin Hubble’s discovery that the Andromeda nebula is actually another “island galaxy” far outside of our own was first published in The New York Times.

1943 – Despite heavy casualties, the battles for the Tarawa and Makin atolls end in U.S. victories against the forces of Imperial Japan.

1963 – The BBC broadcasts the first episode of Doctor Who

1976 – French free diver Jacques Mayol is the first man to reach a depth of 100 meters undersea without breathing equipment.

1981 – President Reagan signs National Security Decision Directive 17 (NSDD-17), giving the CIA authority to recruit and support anti-Communist ‘Contra’ rebels in Nicaragua.

1992 – The first smartphone, the IBM Simon, is introduced at the COMDEX, a computer expo trade show in Las Vegas, Nevada.

2015 – Blue Origin’s New Shepard spacecraft becomes the first rocket to successfully fly to space and then return to Earth for a controlled, vertical landing.

 

Salon Says ‘Guns Are Winning.’ Why That’s a Good Thing

Guns have been part of the American way of life since before this nation was this nation. The American people have had guns for hunting and self-defense as well as defending this land from foreign aggression all that time.

But some people are less than thrilled about this fact.

Today, marks the 60th anniversary of the assassination of JFK. In the wake of that murder, the Gun Control Act of 1968 was passed, in part to prevent someone like Lee Harvey Oswald from being able to get a gun in the manner in which he obtained it.

Yet over at Salon, they have a piece titled, “60 years after the assassination of JFK: The guns are winning.”

Since JFK’s murder, more Americans have died from civilian gunfire than the well over one million American soldiers killed in all of our wars, according to a flyer circulated by the Virginia Center for Public Safety back in January of 2016. A PolitiFact review of the claim noted that the federal Centers of Disease Control and Prevention analysis “of yearly gunfire deaths in the U.S. from 1968 to 2014” all added up to 1.5 million gun-related deaths, greater than the 1.4 million lost to armed conflict since the creation of the nation.

Between 2015 and 2020, the United States had an additional 237,000 gun deaths. In 2021, the United States set a record with 48,830 gun-related deaths, with 54 percent flagged as suicides and 43 percent as murders. Overall, that reflected a 23 percent spike since 2019, according to the Pew Research Center.

It is sixty years after JFK’s murder and the guns are winning with the nation’s children and their families that are increasingly losing.

Maybe it’s just me, but if you’re going to look at total numbers since JFK’s assassination, particularly with regard to guns, then maybe we should look at trends from that time and not cherry pick things to look as scary as possible.

JFK was killed in 1963. The Gun Control Act followed five years later. Not an immediate reaction, to say the least, but looking at the provisions in that law makes it clear it was, in part, a response to the assassination.

And what happened immediately after JFK was killed and continued after the GCA was passed? The homicide rate increased.

That’s from the New York Times. What it shows is an increase in the homicide rate that spiked up in the aftermath of the Gun Control Act and continued to be sky high until the early 1990s and didn’t really get down to the early 1960s homicide rate until around 2010 or so.

During that time, we didn’t see a whole lot of gun control being passed. The Brady Bill was passed in 1993 and we had the now-sunset Assault Weapon Ban in 1994, but violent crime was already starting its downward trend, nearly 30 years after JFK’s assassination.

While the last few years have seen a spike in violent crime, that too is trending downward.

So what happened? Well, during that time period, we also saw the rise of concealed carry. States began empowering people to carry guns for their own protection and people started taking advantage of it. That likely contributed

The Assault Weapon Ban spurred a lot of people to buy AR-15s and similar weapons, creating a demand that still hasn’t been satiated. As these are good weapon for self-defense inside the home, this probably also contributed.

See, the issue with the Salon piece is that it’s blaming recent laws and recent actions from the last 30 years for violent crime that took place in the 30 years immediately after JFK’s death.

As guns have become more popular and people are carrying them more often, the homicide rate has trended downward. Even the spike of 2020 was nothing compared to the murder rates of the 1970s and ’80s.

So, in a way, the premise is right, even if not for the reason the author wants us to think. The guns really are winning. They’re making us safer.

The media might not make it seem that way, especially when you can see all the violence with a few keystrokes, but we’re much better off than we were shortly after JFK’s assassination, and I’m tired of pretending we’re not.