This ain't Hell, but you can see it from here

Category: Legal

  • How’s Gun Control Working Out for Brazil?

    Gun laws in Brazil are relatively severe.  Per Wikipedia (yeah, I know – but I don’t really have the desire to research Brazilian law in-depth myself), gun ownership in Brazil is legal, but heavily restricted.

    One must be 25 years of age to own a firearm in Brazil.  By law firearms must be registered with the government.  A registration tax of R$85 (R$ is the symbol for the Brazilian real) must be paid every three years.  Carrying a firearm outside one’s home requires a special permit.  However, changes in Brazilian federal policy instituted in 2002 made it effectively impossible to get such a permit today.

    Between 1980 and 2011, approximately 1,100,000 Brazilians were murdered.  The homicide rate increased by over 130% – from 11.5 per 100,000 population in 1980 to 27 per 100,000 in 2011.  Between 2008 and 2011 – a time when Brazil’s economy, like the rest of the world’s economy, cooled – 206,000 Brazilians were murdered (an average of roughly 51,500 per year).  And like in the US, murders in Brazil are far more common among males and the young.

    For comparison, the US murder rate is now 5.3 per 100,000 population.

    Murders in Brazil are now not only a Rio/Sao Paulo problem, either.  As commerce and commercial centers have spread across Brazil, so have the murders – murder “followed the money”, so to speak.

    That makes sense, actually.  Criminals certainly do.

    It’s estimated that there are around 17 million firearms in Brazil today.  Less than half (only about 8 million) are legally-owned.  I’m guessing it’s a safe bet that those used in the vast majority of crimes aren’t of the legally-owned variety.

    Yeah, that gun control thing is really working out great for the people of Brazil.  Maybe we ought to study their experience.  We could certainly learn a thing or two from it.

  • The Latest on Sinclair

    Well, it looks like Jeffery A. Sinclair’s (presumably) high priced legal team is getting results.  The Army has dropped one charge against him.

    Sinclair is no longer charged with alcohol possession.  Military prosecutors have agreed to drop that charge.

    His defense team is also asking that the charges relating to porn possession be tossed.  They’re claiming that others had access to the computer, and that the search “violated Sinclair’s First Amendment rights”.

    Um, yeah.  Somehow I don’t remember people serving in-theater on active duty having quite the same freedom to speak their mind and/or access sexually explicit materials as your typical civilian in CONUS.  But maybe I’m wrong.

    The other charges against Sinclair – including forcible sodomy, indecent acts, violating orders and adultery – remain in effect.

    Stay tuned.

     

     

  • Today’s Feel-Good Story – With A Twist

    A man in Millcreek, UT, once again demonstrated the benefits of an armed citizenry yesterday. But this incident was a bit different from the norm.

    Kent Hendrix was awakened yesterday by his son pounding on his bedroom door. His son advised him that someone was being mugged outside.

    As a good citizen, Hendrix threw on some clothes. He then grabbed a weapon and wen to assist.  Several other neighbors did so as well.

    There was indeed an altercation in progress. A woman – a neighbor of Hendrix’s – was being assaulted by a male acquaintance.  Hendrix intervened, drawing his weapon.

    Hendrix’s weapon was a bit unusual, though: a samurai sword (katana) with a 29″ blade.  Seems Hendrix is a martial-arts instructor and trains with swords regularly. He reportedly owned this particular sword for 20 years and keeps it by his bed at night.  He’d grabbed it as he was leaving his bedroom.

    The man reportedly was stunned when he saw Hendrix draw his sword and come towards him. (No word on whether or not he wet himself.) The attacker immediately fled, dropping a Chap-Stick as he did so.

    Hendrix was barefoot, and thus unable to catch the attacker. But he recovered the Chap-Stick, and got close enough to get the license plate number of the attacker’s car as he drove off.

    The attacker later turned himself in to local police.

    Well done, Mr. Hendrix et al. Well done.

  • Text of Senate “Compromise” Gun Bill

    Purportedly available here.

  • “Show Me”

    Recently the Missouri Highway Patrol was asked by unnamed Federal officials to give them a full listing of Missouri concealed carry permit holders.  The request was apparently a verbal one; no written request seems to exist.

    Regardless, the full list of roughly 185,000 Missouri concealed carry permit holders was obtained by the Missouri Highway Patrol – and apparently provided by them to Federal authorities –  on two occasions.  The first time was November 2011; the second, January of 2012.  At some point, the list may have been briefly posted to the Internet as well.

    According to Missouri State Senator Kurt Schaefer, the apparent rationale for requesting the list was so that “they (presumably Federal authorities) can match up anyone who had a mental diagnosis or disability with also having a concealed carry license”.  The list was allegedly provided to the Social Security Administration Office of the Inspector General.

    Missouri is “the Show Me state”.   But somehow, I just don’t think that motto is supposed to apply to any and all random questions asked by Federal officials regarding personal information protected by Missouri state law.

    Needless to say, the implications of this blatant misconduct by both Federal and Missouri State officials are deeply disturbing.

  • Those eroding rights thingies

    Apparently, there’s a notebook out there that was written by James Holmes, the Aurora, Colorado, theater shooter. The journal is supposed be full of nutty shit and Holmes gave it to his shrink who turned it over to police to warn them weeks before the shooting in Aurora that he might be a danger to the community. You’ve heard all about this journal, right? You haven’t? Well, gee, I wonder why. So the Aurora case is getting to be like the Tucson shooting case related to Gabby Giffords in which the police were also aware of the nutty behavior of Jared Loughner and did nothing about it.

    But guess who is facing punishment over the notebook? A Fox reporter, Jana Winter, who reported the existence of the journal;

    Winter is currently facing a jail sentence for refusing to reveal the sources who provided her with alleged Aurora shooter James Holmes’ notebook, which he had sent to a psychiatrist and which was “full of details about how he was going to kill people.” Holmes’ defense attorneys subpoenaed Winter to testify about who told her about the notebook and a Colorado judge has said that he will rule on April 10th whether Winter must reveal her source or face jail time for refusing to testify.

    Winter’s dilemma should not just trouble just her colleagues at Fox News – it should trouble every single American who values the First Amendment, freedom of the press and the free exchange of dialogue between the media and those who supply journalists with information.

    If I was a judge, I’d be more interested in whether or why the police ignored the psychiatrist’s warnings. But then that would highlight why we have shooters like Holmes among us – law enforcement either can’t or won’t enforce the laws that have already been written. that we don’t need more laws, we need committed prosecutors who are supposed to be advocating for the people not advocating for taking more of our rights away. of course, the First Amendment, which is supposed to protect Winters in this case, is just like the Second Amendment to these people – it’s for their convenience and can be waived when it become inconvenient to them.

  • New York State has gone nuts

    Dominick sends us a link to The Blaze which tells the unbelievable story about John Mayer, of Commack, N.Y., whose son was overheard discussing getting even with another boy who had pushed a friend on the playgroud. They talked about going to the villain’s house with a water gun, “paint gun” and a BB gun.

    Mayer told TheBlaze that a teacher overheard the students talking and immediately called police and filed a report. He said the teacher told police something to the effect of, there’s a “kid with a gun, ready to go.” Mayer maintains that no serious death threats were made by the students. The Hauppauge Public School District has not returned several messages left by TheBlaze, therefore, it is not clear what they are claiming was said.

    School officials then “interrogated” the boys, Mayer explained. It was later determined that the 10-year-old boys did not have access to a BB gun, paintball gun or any actual firearms.

    So the school suspended the younger Mayers for two days and police came to Mayer’s household who explained to the father that they may need to confiscate his legally owned and safely stored weapons. So Mayer transferred his guns to friends and a gun shop to prevent their confiscation. He then got a call from the county Pistol Licensing Bureau who informed him that his license was suspended and that the police would come the next day to round up the firearms. he was then informed that his license might be suspended until his 10-year-old son moves out of the house.

    I guess the word “rights” has no meaning in New York State anymore. Aside from his second amendment rights, it seems to me the the fourth amendment says something about “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated…”. The Fifth Amendment mentions that “no person shall…be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law….”

    Has anyone in New York State ever read the Constitution?

  • The Latest Sinclair Update

    It’s time for yet another update on that “fine general”, BG Jeffrey A. Sinclair.

    You remember Sinclair, right – that Army BG accused of various types of  . . . interesting conduct while deployed to Afghanistan?  The same guy whose defense team (or someone else) apparently set up a PR web site to tell his side of the story – a site which IMO stops just short of admitting many if not virtually all of the accusations against him?

    Recently, it appears Sinclair’s current defense team was trying to convince the military judge essentially to allow a trial by multiple juries. The defense’s rationale was a fear that a single court-martial panel might be “overwhelmed” while considering many different charges involving multiple accusers.  I’m not sure I buy that; my guess is that they were angling for some oddball grounds for appeal if he’s convicted.

    In any case, the military judge didn’t buy it.  Sinclair will be tried by a single court-martial panel on all charges.  The judge observed that the members of his court-martial panel – which will apparently consist of other GOs – would be “highly educated and likely to follow instructions”.

    Gee – ya think?