The Laconia Daily Sun reports on February 24, 2018:
State Rep. David Huot, D-Laconia, who was a judge for 33 years, said that, if re-elected, he will introduce a bill that would ban the sale or transfer of AR-15 rifles.
“My view about these things is you deal with the immediate issue,” he said. “All the mass murders that you have are with AR-15s, so I guess that’s what you try to attack.
“The objective would be to tamp this thing down a bit. I don’t want to take anybody’s gun away.”
Rep. Hout doesn’t want to ‘take’ anybody’s gun, but he does want to keep you from buying or selling an AR-15. Having been a judge Rep. Hout should be familiar with the term ‘taking’.
Many types of government action infringe on private property rights. Accordingly, the Fifth Amendment’s compensation requirement is not limited to government seizures of real property. Instead, it extends to all kinds of tangible and intangible property, including but not limited to easements, personal property, contract rights, and trade secrets.
To put it very simply, if you can not sell your AR-15, its value has been greatly diminished. Rep. Hout swore an oath to the Constitution and his proposal is a direct violation of his oath.
Perhaps the people of Laconia will make sure that Rep. Hout is not re-elected so they can be certain that he will not be coming for their guns.
An amendment to the New Hampshire constitution is currently being considered (Feb. 2018). CACR 19 titled ‘Right of Local Community Self-Government’ is offered as a local control amendment. Let’s take a look at this thing.
You will notice that this is composed of two sentences, and the first one is a whooper:
[Art.] 40. [Right of Local Community Self-Government.] All government of right originates from the people, is founded in their consent, and instituted for the general good; the people have the right and the duty to reform governments when those governments manifestly endanger public liberty; and sustainable environmental and economic development can be achieved only when the people affected by governing decisions are the ones who make them; therefore, the people of New Hampshire have an inherent and inalienable right of local, community self-government in each county, municipality, city, and town to enact local laws that protect health, safety, and welfare by recognizing or establishing rights of natural persons, their local communities, and nature; and by securing those rights using prohibitions and other means deemed necessary by the community, including measures to establish, define, alter, or eliminate competing rights, powers, privileges, immunities, or duties of corporations and other business entities operating, or seeking to operate, in the community.
In the beginning, “All government of right originates from the people” can be reworded to, ‘a just body politic must come from the people who create it.’ I think we are doing well so far.
Then, “is founded in their consent” inserts the ‘social contract.’ Let’s just assume for now that ‘their consent’ means everybody agrees to this ‘government of right’, but stipulate that all measures produced by this just government will require 100% agreement of the body politic.
Moving on, “and instituted for the general good“, as we are assuming unanimous agreement, everyone agrees that any rule adopted will help most people and harm none. Who would agree to something that would cause harm to themselves?
On to the next clause we have “the people have the right and the duty to reform governments when those governments manifestly endanger public liberty.” All of a sudden we have a “duty” to reform multiple “governments.” Where did these other governments come from and why is it your responsibility to fix them? ‘Huston, we have a problem!’ If we are living by the just government of our first clause then one person removing their consent is all that is needed for it to be ‘reformed’. Reformed, hmm, must we reform? Perhaps we would be better off without.
Despite the fatal flaws we’ve already encountered, let’s press on. “and sustainable environmental and economic development can be achieved only when the people affected by governing decisions are the ones who make them“, this is a statement which presents itself as a fact, but in reality can only stand as an opinion. A constitution of a just government is no place to be inserting opinions; only those who agree with the opinion could possibly be a party to such a body politic. Perhaps this is where those other governments will be created, in opposition to a government based in the stated opinion previously expressed.
The flaws of the opening statements preclude an sensible reading of the conclusion; “therefore, the people of New Hampshire have an inherent and inalienable right of local, community self-government in each county, municipality, city, and town to enact local laws that protect health, safety, and welfare by recognizing or establishing rights of natural persons, their local communities, and nature.” This being a proposed amendment to the New Hampshire constitution which would be voted upon by only those whom qualify as voters in the state, it would fail to meet its first statement regarding ‘All government of right.’
More absurdity is found in the notion of “establishing rights of natural persons.” If we believe that people have the right to create government and without people there can be no government, how is it possible for government to establish rights for its own creator. One would need to use a bit of circular logic to work that out.
Let’s note that this ‘just government’ is also “establishing rights of”… “their local communities, and nature.” We might need to explore what this community is and how it expresses its government granted rights. How ‘nature’ lets us know about its rights is beyond comprehension.
We’ve come this far, and the truth is located near the end. “and by securing those rights using prohibitions and other means deemed necessary by the community, including measures to establish, define, alter, or eliminate competing rights, powers, privileges, immunities, or duties of corporations and other business entities operating, or seeking to operate, in the community.” Just so you don’t miss it, “using prohibitions and other means deemed necessary by the community” is where they pull out the guns and tell “corporations and other business entities” how things are going to be run in the ‘community.’
Finally we come to the second sentence which loops its way around to the mouth of the snake and down its own throat:
Local laws adopted pursuant to this article shall not weaken existing protections for, or constrict the fundamental rights of, natural persons, or their local communities, or nature, as those protections and rights are secured by local, state, federal, or international law.
While this amendment would serve as the basis of a good episode of The Twilight Zone, it is only suitable for an ITL (inexpedient to legislate) in the house.
I mentioned in the last piece the jeweler whose daily carry pistol was so dirty it wouldn’t fire. So, let’s talk about cleaning. (Nooooooo!)
A firearm is a tool, a relatively simple machine, that should be maintained so as not to inhibit adequate function. I know of a police officer who doesn’t clean: he just keeps adding lube. (I had trouble breathing when he said that.)
The photo is of a Ruger LCP that I pocket carry around the house. It isn’t a stretch to see where the lint could continue to build up and mix with the lube, gumming up the action.
I recently bought a used revolver online. I asked the seller about function. He replied that everything worked as it should. I found that the cylinder was actually very hard to turn. When I got it home, I stripped the cylinder and found years-worth of dirt inside.
Adequate cleaning can be accomplished with a simple kit of basic equipment. A cleaning rod, correctly-sized jag tip, bronze brush, and patches, an old toothbrush, and an appropriate cleaner and lubricant.
You can get a long flexible device (e.g., Bore Snake) for the barrel and you can get a combination cleaner & lube. I’m not a fan of either. I like to see that parts are clean and then lube. With the “snake”, I can’t see that I’ve gotten the barrel clean, as the ones I’ve seen are dark-colored.
I admit to being somewhat obsessive and mildly compulsive, so typically clean after I shoot (unless I’ll be shooting that gun again in a couple of days). I prefer to store guns in a clean state, so I don’t have to deal with the build-up and thickening of dirt and oil and stuff. Or worse: RUST! That aforementioned had rust on the internal action. I’m guessing that the revolver had gotten wet and the owner never cleaned (or looked) inside.
A helpful tip to reduce gumming is to not overdo it with the lubricant. If lube is dripping out of the action, you probably used too much. I like to treat the contact and pivot points and I also use a patch to put a very light coat inside the barrel.
That’s it for today. Again, I’m open to topics, so leave them in the comments section.
“Happiness is a clean gun.” (Apologies to John Lennon.)
Hello fellow (and fellowette) Porcs (and Porcettes).
I have been asked to provide some firearms-related posts, so this is the first of “Rick’s Gun Tips”. (I’m still working on a cute or an alliterative title.)
The chief reason that handguns or any guns) discharge a bullet is that the trigger has been activated. So, logically, the best way to prevent a negligent discharge is to prevent the trigger from being pressed until you are on target and ready to shoot.
While I realize that certain handguns were specifically designed for pocket carry (e.g., Colt 1903, S&W Bodyguard M-49), pockets can have items in them that can work their way in front of the trigger causing it to move rearward.
Additionally, pockets (and purses) are lint magnets. Lint, when mixed with lubricant, can actually gum up the action and prevent the handgun from working when needed. (I read a story about a jeweler who took a defensive handgun class using a full-sized pistol. After class, he asked to shoot a bit with a Walther PPK that he had carried in his jacket pocket while working. The gun was so dirty that it wouldn’t even fire the first shot.)
There are many pocket holsters available to ft almost any pistol that you might carry in a pocket. Although I’m not a big fan of so-called “off body carry” (e.g., in a purse, briefcase, messenger bag), there are bags that were made to hold a pistol in a holster which would be available without rummaging. Additionally, there are nylon holsters available that can be attached to a bag that you already own. (I did this with a waist pack back in the day. The ones made for a pistol seemed bigger than a backpack, so I found a regular one and sewed a nylon holster inside. A perfect disguise.)
It is always recommended to remove the holster from your pants or jacket pocket, place the pistol in the holster, and then return the “package” to your pocket. Attempting to holster the pistol while the holster is already in your pocket can result in a painful (and embarrassing) negligent discharge.
So, let me know what you think of my maiden column. If you have a subject or particular firearm that you would like covered, let me know. Thanks for reading!