Earlier this week, Alan Gura and associates filed the Petitioners “On Writ Of Certiorari To The United States Court Of Appeals For The Seventh Circuit.” I downloaded the Petitioners .pdf document yesterday and started looking through it for a little light reading.

The document contains a ‘Summary of Argument‘ which I have summarized even further here. Disclaimer: this summary in no way intends to profess anything other than a citizen’s interpretation of the contents of the summary.

Section 1 states that the Court has never directly addressed the question of the Fourteenth Amendment’s incorporation of the Second Amendment. It claims confusion is the result of inaction and the Court now has the opportunity to set straight the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment in the context of gun owners civil rights.

Section 2 speaks to the Fourteenth Amendment’s ‘Privileges or Immunities‘ clause which forbids the States from abridging civil rights including, unambiguously, the right to keep and bear arms.

Section 3 brings up The SlaughterHouse Cases of 1873. SlaughterHouse transformed the Framers’ broad protection of individual liberty, commonly understood, into a clause securing only the most obscure rights.

Section 4 speaks about The Fourteenth Amendment’s requirement that no person be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law. Accordingly, most of the rights secured in the first eight amendments have been deemed incorporated as against the States.

The States ratified the Fourteenth Amendment during reconstruction. The amendment sought to restore civil rights that some of the states had stripped away from blacks and abolitionists after the Civil War, including the right to keep and bear arms.

Now is the time for SCOTUS to restore those civil rights to the citizens of Chicago and, indeed, to all Americans.

Also, here’s another chance to weigh in on Sonia Sotomayor:

Prayers go out for the victims and their families and friends in today’s horrible attack in Binghamton, NY.

Sensible gun owners now anticipate anti-gun organizations and anti-gunners in the media and government to jump on the spilled blood as leverage to eliminate dangerous guns. If there were only a few legitimate CCW permits issued to building occupants, this crime may have been over before a dozen victims were killed.

John Lott posted this sensible analysis on FoxNews.com:

Time after time multiple-victim public shootings occur in “gun free zones” — public places where citizens are not legally able to carry guns. The horrible attack today in Binghamton, New York is no different. Every multiple-victim public shooting that I have studied, where more than three people have been killed, has taken place where guns are banned.

You would think that it would be an important part of the news stories for a simple reason: Gun-free zones are a magnet for these attacks. Extensive discussions of these attacks can be found here and here. We want to keep people safe, but the problem is that it is the law-abiding good citizens, not the criminals, who obey these laws. We end up disarming the potential victims and not the criminals. Rather than making places safe for victims, we unintentionally make them safe for the criminal.

At some point, you would think the media would notice that something is going on here, that these murderers aren’t just picking their targets at random. And this pattern isn’t really too surprising. Most people understand that guns deter criminals. . . . .

Every homeowner with firearms in the home may want to pay close attention to this - a new 911 scam that exploits a weakness in the internet telephone system has been sending first responders, usually S.W.A.T. teams, to random phony emergency calls. If this happens to you, be very careful what actions you take.

The scene below takes place after 10 PM in a suburban neighborhood. A homeowner and his family are awakened by loud sirens, footsteps and a helicopter orbiting above.

The family has been SWATTED.

Doug Bates got up to lock the doors and grabbed a knife. A beam from a flashlight hit him. He peeked into the backyard. A swarm of police, assault rifles drawn, ordered him out of the house. Bates emerged, frightened and with the knife in his hand, as his wife frantically dialed 911. They were handcuffed and ordered to the ground while officers stormed the house.

The scene of mayhem and carnage the officers expected was nowhere to be found. Neither the Bateses nor the officers knew that they were pawns in a dangerous game being played 1,200 miles away by a teenager bent on terrifying a random family of strangers.

Bates said that if he had responded with a gun that he feared he would have been shot.

With that in mind, if that ever happens in your neighborhood, keep it cool with the personal armed response. Remember, we keep our guns handy just in case of a 911 emergency where the police can’t respond in time, but NOT if they’ve surrounded your house.

Read the report “New 911 fraud is duping SWAT teams.”

Most criminal law legal experts say that OJ is going to be behind bars for a long time. Judge Jackie Glass, the judge that sentenced OJ, made it clear that the sentence being passed was for the kidnapping and weapons charges only. The fact that she gave a similar sentence to OJ’s partner in crime, Clarence “CJ” Stewart, more or less backs up the notion that the sentence was, indeed, punishment for these crimes only and not karma for something else OJ may have done.

Thirteen years ago, I stood in disbelief when that lame LA jury set OJ free. My hope for the future of this moron is that the parole board, in addition to his despicable character, takes into consideration OJ’s civil liability in the wrongful death of Nichole Brown and Ron Goldman. Throw away the key, people.

Dennis Miller, a longtime critic of post-murder-trial Simpson had this to say on Bill O’Reilly’s TV show:

“When I see O.J.’s mug shot,” Miller cracked, “he has that Mona Lisa smile - this guy is so nuts, I think he’s happy to be back in the limelight. He literally got away with murder, yet was willing to break into someone’s room to get some trading cards.”

Click on the image of Simpson, above, to hear Miller’s thoughts on OJ.

Simpson’s not smiling now, I bet.

More thoughts on OJ’s stupidity from examiner.com

What a sad spectacle and yet a lesson that can be learned by others if they take the time to watch and listen.

O.J.Simpson stood in chains and prison garb in front of the sentencing judge in Las Vegas today and pleaded for leniency. His lawyers had just finished admitting that he was stupid but that stupidity isn’t criminality.

The lawyers made the case for him that the items taken or attempted to be taken were his and there was no criminal intent when he and his little group of idiots burst through the doors of a room in a Las Vegas hotel that day in September 2007, The ownership issue is still a question according to a judge.

…

This should effectively end the O.J.saga in American life unless when he is released while in his late sixties he is still as stupid as he apparently is now.

Sometime this month, Dick Kempthorne, Secretary of the Interior, is expected to rule on the right to carry in National Parks. My opinion is that there is no question that any citizen anywhere in the country has the right to carry.

Unfortunately, the majority of comments that were received from the public on the proposed rule change, opposed any change at all. I predict that the rule will remain as it is now, thus placing legitimate gun owners and all citizens in jeopardy. As we all know, there are no criminals who will respect the rule. There are no animals who will let you be just because you have no self defense.

From the Tacoma News Tribune:

Decision expected on rule about guns in parks

The Department of the Interior is expected to announce this month its decision regarding changes in rules governing guns in national parks and wildlife refuges.

When he visited Mount Rainier National Park for the Oct. 10 opening of the new Jackson Visitor Center, Interior Secretary Dirk [sic] Kempthorne said the announcement would be made soon.

“We’re going through the process. We anticipated we’d get a lot of responses, and we did,” Kempthorne told The News Tribune.

At the end of April, the department proposed a change that would allow people to carry a concealed firearm in a national park or wildlife refuge if the individual is permitted to carry a concealed weapon and is authorized to do so on similar state lands in the state in which the national park or refuge is located.

The department received 130,000 to 140,000 comments on the proposal, said Chris Paolino, deputy director of communications for the department.

I recently got a briefing on Operational Security. The reason for the briefing is to periodically review some of the things that we should consider in our responsibility to keep information safe from unwanted disclosure.

One of the first slides the Operations Security Manager put up on the screen was that of the rear window of an SUV where someone had proudly placed a stick-figure representation of their family, complete with names.

The OSM said “How would you like it if someone who had noticed you and your little kids getting out of the vehicle and going into the store? How would you like it if that person were to entice one of your kids away by calling them by name? ‘Psst, Susie - your mom wants you to come over here with me.’ Sounds frightening, doesn’t it?”

This reminded me of the article Damsel posted on this topic last year which I re-post here.

Wouldn’t it be nice to have your beautiful family depicted in the rear window of your SUV or mini-van? With Dad, Mom, and all the kids’ names? You’ve seen those rear-window decals around.

But I’d think twice before listing my family members’ names for all to see (maybe some sicko predator would like to know your kids’ names). So this is my solution to listing our family members that I want folks to know about . . .

Permission given to copy and use this graphic with link credit to capnbob.us

What part of this common sense advice did this guy not understand?

Store guns so that they are inaccessible to children and other unauthorized users. While specific security measures may vary, a parent must, in every case, assess the exposure of the firearm and absolutely ensure that it is inaccessible to a child.

A three-year old boy “got hold” of his father’s Glock 21 while riding in the back seat and shot the off duty LAPD cop in the back. The man was left paralyzed from the waist down.

Now, two years after the fact he and his wife are suing Glock Inc., the maker of the weapon; the Los Angeles Police Revolver and Athletic Club, which sold him the gun in 2003; Uncle Mike’s and Bushnell Outdoor Products, which manufactured a gun hip holster for the firearm; and Turner’s Outdoorsman, which sold him the holster.

The man claims the safety on the Glock 21 is “non-existent or ineffective to prevent accidental, unknowing or inadvertent discharge.”

I call bullshit. I own two Glocks. The safeties on them work just fine as long as your brat can’t put his booger-picker in the trigger guard. Do you see the little lever sandwiched in the trigger assembly? The trigger can’t move back until the lever is depressed. Simple, effective and elegant.

I’m truly sorry that LAPD lost one of their own to this tragedy and I’m sorry for the ex-cop’s injuries. Other than that, the cop, his wife and the attorney they retained should all be ashamed for blaming one stupid event on everyone but themselves.

Safety Features of the Glock: Continue reading » Kid Shoots Cop - Cop Sues Everybody

We always have fun when we go to the range on Sundays. Fun, but with some serious business thrown in - we have a security gun that we keep handy just in case of (God forbid) intruders or home invaders. It’s important that we both can handle this weapon and we regularly take it to the range for practice.

Our Remington 870 Security Shotgun meets our requirements. This gun has an eighteen inch barrel with a magazine capacity of six 12 gauge rounds plus one round in the chamber.

Sunday, Damsel took her turn with this gun as shown in the video to the right. She makes the most of the seven rounds by knocking the target off of the tee bar with the last round.

You go, girl!

I’d be glad to have her at my six with this weapon any time, baby.

PoliceOne.com had this information about the Remington security guns:

Remington 870 “Wingmaster” was introduced by Remington in 1950, and since then it has become one of the most popular USA-made pump action all-purpose shotguns. Beginning it’s life as a versatile hunting shotgun, available in many different configurations and gauges, in early 1970s the Remington 870 was adopted by US Military - in 1966 US Marine Corps purchased some thousands of the Remington 870 Mk.1 shoguns (along with Mossberg 590 and Winchester 1200). Military shotguns have extended magazines for 7 or 8 rounds, bayonet mounts, heat shields around the barrels and non-glare, protective and rust-resistant finishes.

Remington 870 also is very popular police/security shotgun, available with extended magazines (up to 8 rounds), fixed or folding butt stocks or with pistol grips. Usually, police Remington’s have 14 in. or 18 in. barrels with cylinder or improved cylinder chokes, capable of firing buckshot, slugs and special purpose munitions (tear gas grenades, non-lethal rubber bullets etc.). M870 may be equipped with rifle-style or ghost-ring (peep) sights, with tactical flashlights and lasers etc.

Technically, Remington 870 is a pump-action shotgun with dual action bars and tilting breech block, that locks directly into the barrel extension. Barrel may be swapped (changed) within minutes to fit the situation.