|link| Posted 6:34 AM by Brian Linse

Here We Go Again...

Now it's former executives of Rite-Aid heading in to face indictment on 37 counts from the U.S.Justice Department. Read about it in the Financial Times.

|link| Posted 6:02 AM by Brian Linse

Earthquake in Iran

This NYT story reports at least 500 dead.

|link| Posted 6:48 AM by Brian Linse

Voting Is Your Responsibility

Well it looks like I've finally made it into one of Dawn Olsen's infamous polls, and it's a good one! It even makes up for leaving me out of the Grumpiest Blogger Poll.

Which Blogger Would You Like To Hear Me Sexually Fantasize About?

Now normally I wouldn't stoop to begging readers to vote in one of these things if I were a contestant, but this one is very important to me. So I'm askin' you all...

Please Go Vote For Rebecca of Sweet Flavored Gummi.

As Matt Moore says: "Dude! Hot girl-on-gummi action! Get votin'!"

But sometimes that's just the way the Jell-O judicates.

|link| Posted 5:16 PM by Brian Linse

Surprise, Surprise

Great insights by Matt Yglesias in response to Sulli's surprise at the Bush cozying with Islamic fundamentalists:

The religious right isn't an "extremist wing" of the American conservative movement -- it's the base of the Republican party. Bush doesn't sometimes pander to religious conservatives he is a religious conservative. John Ashcroft wasn't made Attorney General for his anti-terrorism credentials, it was for his anti-abortion credentials.

There's still time to register as a Dem, Sulli...

|link| Posted 9:10 AM by Brian Linse

Shaken, Not Stirred

Classic Ken Layne column at FoxNews.com.

|link| Posted 9:05 AM by Brian Linse

How Long? Too Long.

Jim Henley has a question he'd like answered.

|link| Posted 7:55 AM by Brian Linse

Don't Forget To Duck

Double-Barrel Natalie Solent here and here. This time it's a "Right-Wing Thing", but God I love that woman.

|link| Posted 7:12 AM by Brian Linse

What About This Ted?

After publishing the post below, I made my way over to LGF for my first visit of the day only to find the horrific news of another Palestinian suicide bombing. This time it's 16 innocent victims.

Unless the anticipated "plan" of the Bush Administration involves a dead Arafat and several dozen dead Palestinian terrorist leaders, I don't think I'm going to be very impressed.

[Update: 19 deaths now reported. Go read USS Clueless and Jeff Goldstein for more.]

[Update: Bill Quick has some thoughts I think cut to the real issue, and don't reflect well on Tony Blair's better half.]

|link| Posted 6:52 AM by Brian Linse

This Explains A Lot...

I mentioned in a post shortly after returning from two months in Budapest that I was stunned at how blatantly anti-Israel the coverage was on CNN International. This article explains an awful lot:

Ted Turner, the billionaire founder of CNN, accuses Israel today of engaging in "terrorism" against the Palestinians, in comments that threaten to lead to a further decline in the news network's already poor relations with the Jewish state.

"Aren't the Israelis and the Palestinians both terrorising each other?" says Turner, who is vice-chairman of AOL Time Warner, which owns CNN, in an exclusive interview with the Guardian.

"The Palestinians are fighting with human suicide bombers, that's all they have. The Israelis ... they've got one of the most powerful military machines in the world. The Palestinians have nothing. So who are the terrorists? I would make a case that both sides are involved in terrorism."

What an asshole.

Fellow execs at AOL/TW must all have their faces buried in their hands today. Who would ever have thought that his ex-wife, Jane Fonda, would seem reasonable by comparison?

All those ads I saw on CNN Int'l for Egyptian tourism are beginning to make more sense now too...

|link| Posted 12:15 AM by Brian Linse

Loopholes Closed (I hope...)

Lots of action these last few days on the Gun Show Loophole issue. Jeff at Protein Wisdom has hosted a nice comments discussion, as has The Tipsy One, Stephen Green at VodkaPundit, Rand Simberg, and that lucky guy who gets to see Dawn naked, Eric Olsen of Tres Producers. If this topic is of interest, it is worth the time to read them all.

Much of the debate has centered around the meaning of the term "loophole", so I thought I'd start this attempt to sum things up with a trip to a few dictionaries. None of the online legal dictionaries that I tried had a definition for the term, which leads me to discount arguments that it is not being used in its proper legal context. "Loophole" is apparently not a legal term. Here is the online Webster's definition (number 2 applies, but check out 1a):

Main Entry: 1loop·hole
Pronunciation: 'lüp-"hOl
Function: noun
Etymology: 1loop
Date: 1591
1 a : a small opening through which small arms may be fired b : a similar opening to admit light and air or to permit observation
2 : a means of escape; especially : an ambiguity or omission in the text through which the intent of a statute, contract, or obligation may be evaded.

Glenn Reynolds was kind enough to put me in touch with Dave Kopel, who shares his position on the issue that there is no such thing as a gun show loophole. Mr. Kopel forwarded a few links to some very helpful sites: An analysis by David Hardy of the 1986 Firearm Owners Protection Act (FOPA), which was an amendment to the 1968 Gun Control Act, is very helpful in understanding what legislators were trying to do with gun control laws. Section III A.1 of Hardy's paper states:

Under the wording finally enacted, four elements must be proven to establish "engaging in the business" of dealing in firearms:

1. devotion of time, attention and labor to such dealing;

2. as a regular course of trade or business;

3. with the principal objective of livelihood and profit;

4. through the repetitive purchase and resale of firearms.
[...]
Thus, FOPA substitutes a detailed four-element test for the broad and general criterion used under the Gun Control Act. The central thrust of the FOPA definition is toward limiting the term "engaged in the business" to those who treat firearm sales as a business, either of the "storefront" or the "itinerant peddler" variety.

Now personally, I would describe someone who sells regularly at gun shows with the objective of "livelihood and profit" to be a dealer of the "itinerate peddler" type. And if said dealer chooses not to be licensed, then they are able to sell at gun shows without requiring background checks. Brother Goldstein at PW points out that such a person is simply violating the law, and not taking advantage of a loophole. And Glenn Reynolds wrote in an e-mail to me that: "Well (and I had a post on this somewhere) if it's a loophole at all it's a loophole in enforcement, not in the statute, since you're basically arguing that there are people who *are* in the business, and ought to have licenses, but don't."

But how is law enforcement supposed to know that any given person at a gun show is making a livelihood or profit at multiple gun shows without expending great resources to follow each and every seller throughout the year? The answer is, they don't, and that's where the loophole, "an ambiguity or omission in the text through which the intent of a statute, contract, or obligation may be evaded," comes in.

FOPA is a little ambiguous on just what constitutes "engaged in business". They were absolutely unambiguous about wanting to protect private owners from liability, but there are no guidelines as to the number of firearms that can be sold, or the amount of profit necessary to establish a seller as a dealer. If I sell 200 guns at shows over the course of a year, and make a profit of, say, $2,000.00, am I a dealer? What if I sell 1000 guns in a year? The FOPA statute is not clear on this, and since they clearly meant to regulate "dealers" I must conclude that there is a "gun show loophole".

Of course, my position on this does not endorse the willful distortion of facts and clearly intended emotional appeals of the gun control extremists in pursuing their ultimate agenda of a total ban on firearms. Dave Kopel delivers a smackdown here, and also forwarded a link to this US Bureau of Justice Statistics site that shows that gun show purchased weapons have so far been an insignificant percentage of the guns used in domestic criminal activity. Gun show and flea market weapons accounted for only 2%, while family, friends, illegal buys, and street buys accounted for 80% (1997 stats). On this point, I am in total agreement with my gun buddies.

Domestic crime was not the question that began this thread, however. The thread began when I questioned Reynolds and Goldstein's assertion that "there is no loophole" in response to a piece in the NY Times that claimed the gun show loophole was a potential source of weapons for terrorists.

What will the "there is no loophole" folks say if, (God forbid) an act of terrorism is perpetrated on US soil by some of bin Laden's boys armed with gun show weapons? Why should we support the Bush Administration's weakening of other civil liberties, yet leave this potential threat unattended?

I would advocate amending FOPA in the manner (Sec.1 F.) that the State of Colorado used to close the loophole within it's borders. Simply define all firearms sellers at gun shows to be "dealers", and let existing laws regulate sales.

But... Brady Campaign assholes would no doubt start chirping about a "garage sale loophole", and that is why the defenders of the slippery slope theory don't want to cave in on gun shows. I believe, however, under the current circumstances of terrorist threat, gun rights activists should endorse tighter restrictions at gun shows. Terrorism with gun show weapons hasn't happened yet, but should be a concern for preemptive action.

Requiring registration for all private sales would never be acceptable to those who fear confiscation. I am not one who harbors this fear, but I can understand it and even support the theory behind it. I have never sold any of my guns, but if I did, I would go through a dealer requiring background checks under any circumstance. I would not want to live with the fear that a gun that I had sold would end up in wrong hands. But I am just not ready to endorse government regulation of all private gun sales. Under the current circumstances of the war against Islamist terror, I am willing to trust the judgment of individuals, but not the judgment of "dealers" whose motive is profit. Regulation of all private sales may one day be addressed, but I believe that the developing "Individual Right" interpretation of the 2nd Amendment will prevent this from happening.

In any case, it seems to me that there is a potential "problem" with gun show sales. I call it a loophole, and don't really care what anyone else calls it as long as it is closed.

|link| Posted 6:39 PM by Brian Linse

Lefty Bashing

Glenn Reynolds is taking some heat for another of his broad bashings of "Lefties". Both Atrios and MaxSpeak are challenging Glenn for this post. I went a few rounds with Glenn on this topic back in December when the trigger was Marin County's Johnny Taliban, so I think I'll sit this one out. Anyway, I know that InstantMan isn't as Far Right as his rhetoric sometimes makes him appear.

|link| Posted 3:24 AM by Brian Linse

Scott Shuger

Slate's Scott Shuger died in an apparent diving accident over the weekend. The feature that he originated at Slate, Today's Papers, was the first internet source of news that I ever used. I still have it delivered by e-mail each morning. Michael Kinsley has a remembrance here.

|link| Posted 5:16 AM by Brian Linse

Just Shoot Me

Oh Dear Lord, Jesus, Buddha, L.Ron Hubbard... Someone! Please deliver me from this picture on Dawson's blog. Everyone's favorite "elf", Miss Ann Coulter, in cut-offs and pumps, firing a rifle! Though I find the location, which places young Ann either in Appalachia or maybe a suburb of Gary, Indiana, very amusing, the thought of an armed Ann Coulter is a little terrifying.

I guess I can only hope that Brother Dawson's post will cause right-wing blog boys everywhere to lock up their laptops with precious bodily fluids, thus leaving fewer of their rantings in the Blogosphere for a short period of time.

Cut-offs and pumps!?

Oh, Ann...

|link| Posted 3:35 AM by Brian Linse

Andersen Verdict

RonK has a great analysis of the Andersen Guilty verdict over in Camp Enron.

|link| Posted 2:01 AM by Brian Linse

The DuPont Chronicles

The collected works of Stephanie DuPont have been added to the BadDude Annex. It was fun reading through them all again. I think I'll give young Stephie a call and see what she is up to...

|link| Posted 12:28 AM by Brian Linse

Weird Gun Stuff

A follow up post on the Gun Show Loop-de-loop thingy is coming. But in the interim, check out this post over at Coyote at the Dog Show. These are some strange facts that I was not aware of. Coyote also asks why we don't hear about them. Good question...

|link| Posted 12:17 AM by Brian Linse

A Rogue's, uh, I Mean Blogs Gallery

The unstoppable Nick Denton has launched a beta for a picture gallery of bloggers. Fun stuff! I was very surprised at how many people looked nothing like I imagined. Send Nick more pics!