A Low Point for National Public Radio

I'm a little late on this, but I figured that I should talk about it. A friend of mine considered the story unreliable because it was originally published by a blog, and not an 'accredited news source'.

This email was supposedly sent out from one of the NPR show On Point's staffers' personal Gmail accounts (which is impossible to verify) and only sent to one blogger that subsequently posted about it. The reportedly legitimate email shows NPR shopping around for a specific opinion. As far as I can tell, it might be a fake story by the blogger, an over-zealous staffer at On Point, or simply a way for them to solicit opposing viewpoints. I believe that the blogger is an honest source, but it's understandable if you do not. That portion is he-said-she said, though the On-Point segment page is very defensive about the guesting and does not deny the well-publicized accusations. 'Not denying' is not the same as 'admitting', but you should take that into account.

They say that the proof is in the pudding, so let's examine the 'ingredients' in the pudding. Here are the guests that were selected to speak on the show:

Robert Levy, a pro-gun lawyer who was co-counsel on D.C. V Heller, which positively established the 2nd Amendment as an individual right.

Tracee Larson, an unknown 'pro-gun' blogger who had posted exactly twice before the segment and had worked on the advisory board for the purely Democrat supporting false flag American Hunters and Shooters Association (not long after the presidential election ended the AHSA's website went down and has not come back up). In her blog post after she did the NPR segment she stated "Why the average gun owner needs more than 10 bullets in a magazine is beyond me", so we can guess which side of the issue she started on. It was her opinion that was reportedly sought to help balance the piece.

Next, Carolyn McCarthy, the Senator who is introducing the magazine ban bill.

Lastly, Paul Helmke, the president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence (the primary anti-2nd Amendment organization in the nation)

Listen to the audio. Listen to the way the host phrases the questions. Listen to how much time Paul Helmke gets compared to Robert Levy. Listen to how angry the host gets when Mr. Levy asks for a chance to respond to Mr. Helmke's accusations. Listen to how the host uses questions in a way intended to keep Mr. Levy on the defensive.

So to recap we have a one pro-gun lawyer who is given very little time, one *pro-gun* newly minted blogger who supports this specific piece legislation, the senator who introduced the legislation, and the president of the Brady Campaign all interviewed by a host with an agenda.

I often enjoy NPR's programming, and I realize that this was only one segment on one day in a whole bevy of segments day in a day out all year round, but it really was a terribly one-sided setup presented as showing all sides of the issue. If their intent in sending out the email was to solicit a specific viewpoint for the show, they certainly did. You can be the judge of how balanced their guesting was.

This, in my opinion, was not a high point for journalistic integrity.

The Art of the Tactical Nap

In every deployment the time between when you leave theater and when you get home is a form of limbo. And not the fun kind with tiki torches and drinks with little umbrellas.

You are given a few briefings and go through Navy Customs, but most of your time is spent waiting. You wait for your flights, you wait for the buses, you wait for take-off. The amount of actual time spent varies, but inevitably it seems to take longer than it 'should'. Delays happen at every available opportunity and cause an increasing sense of frustration for everyone involved.

The best thing you can do is practice the art of napping. There is a civilian version of this, of course, but the military has perfected a more rugged variant ideal for extended periods in uncomfortable positions. Anyone who has been through Basic Training knows about this. Flat concrete pads and gravel roads are equally as usable as a down mattress to an experienced military napper.

It passes the time very quickly, and that's all anyone could want when waiting to go home.

So yeah...

That didn't work out like I hoped it would.

...

More to follow?

More updates to follow

The bloggosphere has been lamenting my lack of involvement recently, but no more!

With a deployment coming up in the next few weeks I will probably have a lot more time to blog.

Rejoice, Intarwubs!

Children and gun safety

My sincerest condolences go out to the family of Anthony Brastad. It is always a tragedy when a child dies, and doubly so under such circumstances.

For all of us, this terrible event has illuminated a problem that is always present in an armed society: children and guns.

Cornered Cat has some excellent advice on the subject that all gun-owning parents would do well to take to heart.

Fight Cancer with an AR-15!

FBMG has come up with a novel way to raise funds for breast cancer research. They are raffling off this beautiful pink rifle:Tickets are $5 each, and all proceeds go to the to the breast cancer research effort at the American Cancer Society.

Suppressor Law in MN

As a firearms enthusiast and resident of the great state of Minnesota, I believe it is past time we reconsider our state's stance on the use of firearm suppressors. Current law stands as such(view full law):

Subd. 1a. Felony crimes; silencers prohibited; reckless discharge. (a) Except as otherwise provided in subdivision 1h, whoever does any of the following is guilty of a felony and may be sentenced as provided in paragraph (b):
(1) sells or has in possession any device designed to silence or muffle the discharge of a firearm;

...

Subd. 1h. Silencers; authorized for law enforcement and wildlife control purposes. (a)
Notwithstanding subdivision 1a, paragraph (a), clause (1), licensed peace officers may use devices designed to silence or muffle the discharge of a firearm for tactical emergency response operations. Tactical emergency response operations include execution of high risk search and arrest warrants, incidents of terrorism, hostage rescue, and any other tactical deployments involving high risk circumstances. The chief law enforcement officer of a law enforcement agency that has the need to
use silencing devices must establish and enforce a written policy governing the use of the devices.
(b) Notwithstanding subdivision 1a, paragraph (a), clause (1), until July 1, 2011, an
enforcement officer, as defined in section 97A.015, subdivision 18, a wildlife area manager, an employee designated under section 84.0835, or a person acting under contract with the commissioner of natural resources, at specific times and locations that are authorized by the commissioner of natural resources may use devices designed to silence or muffle the discharge of a firearm for wildlife control operations that require stealth. If the commissioner determines that the use of silencing devices is necessary under this paragraph, the commissioner must:
(1) establish and enforce a written policy governing the use, possession, and transportation of the devices;
(2) limit the number of the silencing devices maintained by the Department of Natural Resources to no more than ten; and
(3) keep direct custody and control of the devices when the devices are not specifically authorized for use.
Subd. 2. Exceptions. Nothing in this section prohibits the possession of the articles
mentioned by museums or collectors of art or for other lawful purposes of public exhibition.

Silencers, suppressors, mufflers or whatever you want to call them are legal to own and operate in 36 of the 50 states with the appropriate tax stamps and forms from the BATFE.

Keep in mind that Minnesota law allows for the possession of destructive devices (grenades, launchers, AT-4s, etc.), short-barreled shotguns, and short-barreled rifles.

Suppressors are the only NFA items that Minnesotans are not allowed to own.

Also keep in mind that there has never in United States history been a prosecuted crime committed with a lawfully-owned suppressor.

Suppressors have many benefits, such as lowering noise pollution from gun ranges, increasing the effectiveness of firearm safety courses by allowing the instructors to communicate with students without yelling to be heard, and allowing night-time varmint hunters to hunt coyotes without waking the neighbors.

Hollywood has done a tremendous job of exaggerating the effectiveness of suppressors. We've all seen the movie where the bad guys are running around with silenced machine guns, shooting at the good guy with every shot whisper-quiet.

The truth is that suppressors are much less effective than movies lead us to believe, bringing a painful report down to a level where enthusiasts can fire without ear protection.

The shooting starts around 2:50.

No, no one absolutely needs a suppressor. But then again, no one needs a Corvette or a pool in their backyard. The ability to possess something should not be dictated by need in a capitalist democracy such as ours.

UPDATE: Suppressors are now legal to own in Minnesota for police departments, military units and Federal Firearms Licensees who sell to these organizations. A step in the right direction, says I.

Also, if you have the large amounts of cashola lying around and really, really want a suppressor, you can become a Class III FFL holder and keep suppressors in your 'inventory'.