The Dog Ate My Homework, er, Plastic Pistol

Philip Bump over at The Atlantic Wire tries, and fails, to print a pistol.
Go read it.

Posse Comitatus Is Dead, Again

And you thought it was the NDAA that killed it.

The lines blurred even further Monday as a new dynamic was introduced to the militarization of domestic law enforcement. By making a few subtle changes to a regulation in the U.S. Code titled“Defense Support of Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies” the military has quietly granted itself the ability to police the streets without obtaining prior local or state consent, upending a precedent that has been in place for more than two centuries. <br>
“This is a complete erosion of the rule of law,” says (journalist and activist) O’Brien. Knowing these sweeping powers were granted under a rule change and not by Congress is even more harrowing to activists. “That anything can be made legal,” says O’Brien, “is fundamentally antithetical to good governance.”
As far as what might qualify as a civil disturbance, Afran notes, “In the Sixties all of the Vietnam protests would meet this description. We saw Kent State. This would legalize Kent State.”

And in the vein of "We aren't responsible, we only trained 'em." 

The DoD official even referred to the Boston bombing suspects manhunt saying, “Like most major police departments, if you didn’t know they were a police department you would think they were the military.” According to this official there has purposely been a “large transfer of technology so that the military doesn’t have to get involved.” Moreover, he says the military has learned from past events, such as the siege at Waco, where ATF officials mishandled military equipment. “We have transferred the technology so we don’t have to loan it,” he states.

Go read it.

It's How The Frog Gets Boiled

For one thing it's not clear to me how the Manchin-Toomey legislation would require law-abiding citizens give up an essential liberty; it would not prevent law-abiding citizens from buying guns and it wouldn't prohibit any classes of guns from being built or owned. It would close a loophole in an existing background check regime.

And there is the rub. Closing the so called "loophole" is another incremental step toward the ultimate goal of registration. There is no way for the government to know where all the guns are without some sort of registration scheme. That registration has to come through the form of "common sense" laws like Manchin-Toomey being passed and then expanded. Those who believe that this is "common sense" have not bothered to research the history of gun registration. If they had, they might be singing a different tune. 

Go read it.

Where to Start?

The rebuttal examines the very spirit of the Constitution. Our Second Amendment rights guarantee us the right to keep and bear arms without infringement. What's missing from the average gun owner's argument is the critical first portion of the amendment right: "A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state." This short phrase not only brings up the question of the government's right to control guns at all, but the rights of the people to form militias for the protection of their states. 

What? I'm not even sure what is being said here.

Adding all the assets of demographic areas and resources, it's doubtful the federal government would favor very well the formation of separate state militias. Nor has it dealt kindly with self-appointed militias that have sprung up randomly throughout the U.S. There is a high level of distrust on both sides, a suspicion that either the population will turn on the government or the government will turn on the citizens. 

Sheesh. Try the phrases "unorganized militia United States" and "standing army" in your favorite search engine. 

Then think about it this way. Who cares what "the government" wants? The government is of, by and for the people. If the people prefer a milita system to a regular army then so be it.
Go read it.