More permits with new law, and more "standards"

Who would have thought that?

Contributing to a few little falsehoods, like:

The fact that people can receive a permit without being required to have previous training or experience is one reason there have been so many applications, [Webster County Sheriff] Mickelson said.

New law requires NRA training or previous military experience. I guess that doesn't count.

Even though there hasn't been a problem with citizens mishandling firearms in his county, Sheriff Mickelson is wanting a change to fix something that isn't an issue:

Though there hasn't been an increase in gun related incidents, Mickelson said, his biggest concern is that not everyone applying for a permit has adequate weapon-handling experience.

"I think a new person that's never handled a gun before should be able to fire it and know how to handle it, but you don't have to do that," he said.

And he has the in-depth knowledge of everyone's firearm experience? I don't go out shooting with anyone in our sheriffs department. How would they know what kind of experience (or lack of ) unless they shadow each applicant.

And how about this bit:

Previously, the state Legislature had required that people applying for a gun permit had to have some prior weapons experience.

Actually it was up to the sheriffs where each county had a different standard. Some counties basically followed the current state law, others (if they would even allow permits) had a tougher standard.

Mickelson's solution to the non-problem problem?

His proposed solution? Standardized training throughout the state, as well as standardized ID cards.

"There's no standard they have to go by in the state of Iowa. That's what really needs to be done," he said. "It's just a little scary when they only have to take a written test. In fact, some of them aren't taking the test."

Make it even tougher to exercise one of your rights. Added hoplophobia bonus points for throwing in the "scary" adjective.

You can read all of the good sheriff's comments over at: Sheriff’s departments deal with more gun permit requests

Badger Guns lawsuit update, 5/18/11

Two Milwaukee police officers wounded with a gun sold by Badger Guns won a victory in court Tuesday when a Milwaukee County judge rejected a motion to dismiss their lawsuit against the West Milwaukee gun dealer.

Judge allows lawsuit against Badger Guns to proceed

Nevermind that the ATF has never brought charges against Badger Guns for selling to prohibited persons.

Check the history of Badger Guns.

A power not exploited is a power wasted

Alvie at Cliffs of Insanity reports of an Indiana sheriff who just can't wait to use a newly sanctioned power to conduct random house searches.

For some reason the good sheriff thinks people will welcome the opportunity to be treated like shit subjects.

Reminder - Iowa DNR auction, May 21, 2011

Come to Des Moines to save a gun from a life of crime.

DNR Gun list

DNR Bows, Traps, Misc list

Tired of paying a mortgage?

Can you say loophole?

Fine Point of Iowa Law: Thanks to a loophole recently sanctioned by the Iowa Court of Appeals, Matt Danielson and his wife, Jamie, now own their home in Ankeny, Iowa, outright (value: $278,000) after making just one monthly mortgage payment. Iowa law regards a home mortgage by a married couple as automatically void if only one spouse has signed it, and a thusly voided mortgage is treated as fully satisfied. (The purpose was to prevent one estranged spouse from exploiting the other, but the voiding is automatic regardless of the circumstances.) Legislators are currently trying to change the law to leave the discretion of voiding up to judges.

Found at Chuck Shepherd's News of the Weird.

More background on the Danielsons here.

Your rights have to be debated

A follow-up from a previous post: Your Constitutional rights have been violated

It seems that one council member wants a "robust debate" regarding whether cab drivers can legally carry firearms for protection.

City Council member Justin Shields wants a robust debate and some analysis from the city’s legal team before the council votes to approve firearms in city-licensed taxi cabs.

The rules have changed

Jim over at The Travis McGee Reader links to a story of the Indiana Supreme Court deciding that the 4th Amendment was no longer relevant.

In a 3-2 decision, Justice Steven David writing for the court said if a police officer wants to enter a home for any reason or no reason at all, a homeowner cannot do anything to block the officer's entry.

Is this not the very definition of a police state?


(Please forgive my bad editing skills, original photo here)

Apparently the Indiana court also desires to obliterate the idea obtaining a warrant for no-knock raids:

This is the second major Indiana Supreme Court ruling this week involving police entry into a home.

On Tuesday, the court said police serving a warrant may enter a home without knocking if officers decide circumstances justify it. Prior to that ruling, police serving a warrant would have to obtain a judge's permission to enter without knocking.

Court: No right to resist illegal cop entry into home

Coming to your house real soon. They might be kind enough to knock on the door (or not).


Just don't try to stop them. Because in Indiana, you don't have a right to.

Sunday (not so) funnies, 5/15/11

Full disclosure: My father was an Amtrak conductor in the late 70's until he retired in '83. Even he call them "Halftrack" at the time. He claimed that passenger rail lost its profitability after the government started moving bulk mail by truck instead of rail.

As always - click on the picture to go to the original location and find many more poignant political cartoons.

Wisconsin Carry, Inc lawsuit against Madison PD

Disorderly conduct (for legally openly carrying) charges were dropped, but that isn't stopping Wisconsin Carry, Inc. from filing a lawsuit.

Ignorance of firearm law in Wisconsin sparked this whole mess.

Constitutional Carry in Wisconsin?

The bill is on the move. "This bill eliminates the prohibition against going armed with a concealed and dangerous weapon."

A newly floated bill that would allow Wisconsin residents to carry concealed weapons without getting permits, background checks or training would essentially let the state catch up with the latest thinking in gun law, according to backers who call the approach "constitutional carry."

Others, however, seem stunned at the idea that anyone who could lawfully own a gun could carry it just about anywhere, under a coat or in a purse, without any government oversight.

Gun bills trigger applause, dismay

And what did the Iowa legislature do this year regarding "Constitutional Carry?"