Local Ordnance Ordinance

Whilst looking through my village website (Saukville, WI) to try and figure out what local positions, if any, were up for election April 1st, I came across an antiquated part of our municipal code:

140-2: No person except an authorized police officer shall discharge any firearm within the Village or have any firearm in his possession within the Village unless it is unloaded and knocked down and enclosed in a carrying case or other suitable container, provided that the Board may issue permits to an organized gun club to engage in target practice within the Village at times and places designated by the Chief of Police.

This is problematic because, in 1995, Wisconsin adopted a "preemption" law that forbids any subdivision of the State from enacting firearms laws which are more stringent than the current State statutes (with the exception of discharge). This is 66.0409 (it was 66.072 originally, and then later moved).

I know that the law is null and void at this point, but I hate sloppy government, so I am going to look into what it will take to get it removed from the code, as I do open carry around my house, and there is no exemption for the home.

The last thing I need is a police officer harassing me for violation of an illegal ordinance.

I'm a (sophisticated) HK Fanboy

I posted this over in this thread, written by the gentleman of "Because you suck, and we hate you" H&K rant fame. I agree with the gentleman, and wanted to share my reasons for fanboyness:

Quick story on why I love my USP .45, and why it's no better or worse than other sidearms, but I'll always like it the best:

Ok, so about two years ago now I got married. I was living with my new wife for several months, and it had been bothering me that I had no firearms at all. The best I could do in a home invasion scenario was hope for the best.

"Hope is not a strategy."

So, when my brother-in-law approached me and asked "hey, didn't you say you wanted a H&K .45?" I said yes. Yes, but I could not afford one. He was surprised to find out the retail price on the gun, and then asked me what I could afford. I was lucky enough to get a 0 round count USP for $500 through private sale (it was a family friend's who was moving to an assisted living home and could no longer keep firearms).

Now, I had wanted a SS slide full-size USP .45 ever since playing Half Life 2 (though it was 9mm in the game, I wanted a good 'ol American cartridge). Yes, I am a video game geek. This was my favorite gun, from my favorite game, and I wanted to have one someday. It turned out to be the first gun I owned.

Now, I have not a drop of German blood in my veins, but the Italian and Irish mix evidentally set me up with the perfect hand to hold a full-size USP .45 with great comfort, and I happen to like the trigger on it (though I think I like a lot of SIGs better). It is a very pretty gun, I think, and not clumsy at all (*cough* Glock *cough*). I like where the controls are, and above all I LOVE THE MAGAZINE RELEASE. Paddle style is the best for me, and I HATE button type releases.

So, basically, I love my USP because I am a video game H&K fanboy. But I'm not the snobby kind that thinks their guns' smoke don't stink. There are upsides and downsides to all designs and manufacturers, and there are times when mythology and personal preference really can matter the most. Now, next on my dream list is a Barrett .50 or an old MP-44...

Bringing a Knife...

...to the Proverbial Gunfight. Sheesh, Clayton even helps her out a bit and she still flops.

h/t to Dave Hardy

WI April 1 Election

Okay, okay. For you out-of-staters, there are all sorts of jokes involved in the peculiar choice of dates for this election, but let's save those for the off-chance that the good guys lose elections. There are two major judgeships here in the Southeastern part of the state:

Court of Appeals, District II:
Bill Gleisner
Lisa Neubauer

Wisconsin Supreme Court:
Louis Butler
Michael Gableman

And here's my take:

Wisconsin Supreme Court:
Louis Butler was appointed to this position by our scoundrel of a governor, "Diamond Jim" Doyle, in 2004, after Justice Diane Sykes was given a federal appointment to the Seventh Circuit Court by President Bush. Justice Sykes had defeated Butler in the 1998 election after an appointment by then-governor Tommy Thompson. This defeat was a landslide, with Butler losing in all 72 counties, and earning only 34% of the vote. So, we have looked this man in the face before, and found him unworthy. It speaks volumes that our governor would appoint a man who had been so flatly rejected by his constituency. This man was involved in the destruction of our liability laws, including the ridiculous lead paint lawsuit (as if his appointment by Doyle wasn't enough to make him unfit for the job). This man needs to be removed from this bench before he is able to do any more damage.

Judge Gableman was appointed to the Burnett County Circuit Court in 2002 by then-governor McCallum, and promptly reaffirmed by the people there with 78% of the vote in the 2003 election. His background is that of a prosecutor and district attorney, and his record seems to indicate he's going to be very good about ruling in a constructionalist manner. Oh, and I signed his petition for consideration when I met him at a gun show. I did not have time to speak with him about Hamdan or Fischer, but I'd very much like to hear his opinions.

Conclusion: I'm voting for Gableman. In the coming years and months, we need a Supreme Court who will uphold our State Constitution, especially considering the possible firearms litigation in the fight for good carry-of-arms laws.

Court of Appeals, District II:
Lisa Neubauer. Goodness, where to start. She's a PoliSci major from UW Madison, which for those who don't know, is a worse bastion of socialist brainwashing than UC Berkley ever was in the 60s. So, she's been tainted goods from the start, but I'll go on. She was an "advisor" to Herbie Kohl on the Alito and Roberts nominations to SCOTUS. Kohl did not support Alito's nomination, and Mrs. Neubauer's contribution to that position is another mark against her. Now, they did support Robert's nomination, but Roberts isn't nearly as good an ally as Alito. We'll chalk that up to no points gained, none lost. She is endorsed by the Teamsters (yes, that is certainly a bad thing). Lastly on my brief list here, is she is married to the former head of the WI Democrat Party, and is supported by Doyle (she was actually appointed to her current judgeship by him). In the words of Monty Python, she is "right out."

Bill Gleisner quotes Chief Justice Roberts in his judicial philosophy, which appears to be adherence to Constitutional principles. He is a trial lawyer, which does raise questions about liability issues and the like, but so long as he means what he says about judicial restraint, it should be moot. His body of scholarly works include many pieces on the nuances of technology and the law (electronic surveillance, evidence gathering, and the like). Some of his supporters include judges that have made some pretty good decisions (insofar as gun rights and liability issues are concerned). I was hoping to see Noonan (Milwaukee Circuit Court) on that list, but Wagner (same court) was there.

Conclusions: This is, on its face, a tough one. Neubauer's closeness to Doyle is a pretty big turnoff to me, and she seems to be solidly supported by the normal liberal trash. I've heard Gleisner criticized for his background as a trial lawyer, but it seems that he shares that with Neubauer (her specialty was insurance litigation), so it's really a wash. Neubauer has no philosophy posted on her website (which means she's either hiding it or she doesn't have one; an appellate judge should have more conviction than a circuit court judge.), and if I am to believe Gleisner's, then he is my man. Gleisner has a larger body of scholarly work, and it is in a field that will be important in the coming years. Unless I dig something else up, I'm pulling the lever for Bill Gleisner.

Profile Update

Well, almost a month late, but I just noticed my profile hadn't been changed since my birthday. I am now 27 years old.

Best Wine this Week

This week's best wine is a 2004 Cesari Mara. It is a Vino Di Ripasso, meaning that after an Amarone del Valpolicella is pressed, this regular Valpolicella is passed through the remaining pulp, and it picks up much of the power of the Amarone. I've been a fan of this particular wine for several vintages now, but if you can't find this one, I suggest the Zenato another great vitner.

Societal Critical Mass?

Teaser - After listening to a co-worker's comments a few days ago, I started thinking of how to approach the issue of societal critical mass. Is there a population density, growth rate, or infrastructure development point at which a push to socialism and the erradication of individual liberty is almost inevitable? Europe was the example used, but I'm going to look up literature on this and see if I can't make some sense of it. After all, as my English/Literature teachers always implied when writing papers: if someone else didn't already say it or write it, your idea has no merits.

Heller Update.

Update: Check out Say Uncle for the best collection of hawt-links on Heller information and predictions.

I can't say anything that hasn't been said by someone who knows a great deal more about SCOTUS than I do, but after reading the oral arguments, here's my take:

1) The individual right, separate from militia duty, seems to be pretty much a foregone conclusion by at least 6-7 of the justices. Questions seemed more tailored to the scope of the regulatory authority of Congress than anything else. I think 7 of the 9 will support this.

2) The ban will be struck down as unconstituional by 5 of the 9 justices. Kennedy was clearly advocating self defense as a human right, pre-dating our government. His characterization of US v. Miller as "deficient" was priceless.

3) There will not be a majority of justices willing to apply a test to 2nd Amendment challenges. This means no level of scrutiny. This is the double-edged sword of conservative justices - they generally rule properly, but like to only do so on the EXACT matter at hand. There will be no sweeping banner-raising for gun rights here.

I think this leaves us in a great position to begin lawsuits against other types of legislation, on the local, state, and national level. I think it may be possible under such a ruling to get the 1986 new-machinegun prohibition lifted, as it is really no different than the D.C. registry (well, other than the fact that it deals with "scary" weapons).

I am feeling very good about this heading into June, when the decisions will likely be published.

My Apologies

I have been deficient in my blogging duties. Expect a write-up on the Wisconsin Supreme Court and Appelate Court elections in the next few days.