The argument seems to be that Baldwin was screwing around and negligently fired the weapon. However, it also seems to be the case that he was given a gun and told by the armorer that it was not loaded. Assuming those, I’m dubious that a solid legal case can be made against him. The prop master is in serious trouble (and is also charged), no doubt, but Baldwin was told it was safe. That said: I’m never, EVER trusting a weapon to be unloaded and safe until such time as I have personally inspected it. Do I trust the person handing me the weapon? Quite possible. But “trust” has a hell of a time stacking up against “oops, I accidentally shot myself/someone else.”
So jail time for Baldwin? I’m uncertain. A massive fortune-thinning lawsuit? Oh yeah. Kind of a given.
This should prove interesting and quite possibly terribly sad: famed manufacturer of .50 caliber rifles Barrett has sold out to an Australian defense contractor, meaning it is now a company run by a government that does not allow it’s subjects to own such things. Will production remain in Tennessee? Will they continue to sell to the US civilian market?
All management and staff at the Murfreesboro manufacturing facility in Tennessee have been retained and production will continue as normal. Over time it is expected that manufacturing activities in Murfreesboro will be further expanded.
Uh-oh. If history has taught me anything, an official statement that “all is well” results in “everybody panic.” It may be that this is part of the strategy t make the deal profitable: a *lot* of people are going to believe, and not without cause, that Barretts for the US civvie market are going to dry up, and will therefore panic-buy. This will lead to an infusion of cash pretty quickly. It will then be up to the Aussies, from the same Australia that went full Big Brother the first chance it got when the Commie Cough hit, to decide whether to keep the golden goose alive, or to slaughter it.
Barretts are, of course, a particular favorite firearm to hate for the gun grabbers… not because they are actually used in crimes, but because these people are scared of big things they don’t understand (along with little things they don’t understand). Yanking them from the civilian market is something these authoritarian tyrants would love to do. One straightforward way to do it is simply buy the company and stop selling them to peons like us.
The attorney general of the state of Illinois is annoyed that the great majority of the county sheriffs – elected officials who do not report to the Governor, nor can he remove them from office – have told the Governor to get bent over the issue of arresting several million citizens for the crime of owning semi-automatic rifles and standard capacity magazines. The AG believes that other police forces than county sheriffs can do the job, such as the State Police. Perhaps he thinks the Governor can call up the National Guard for this task. But for those sheriffs who take their jobs seriously, they may well arrest State Police who attempt to arrest citizens. And the sheriffs would be right to do so: their oaths tend to include words to the effect of “protect and defend the Constitution of the United States,” and banning magazines and firearms is, especially in light of recent Supreme Court decisions, monumentally and obviously unconstitutional.
This would not be unprecedented. Recall the ATF agent who got himself arrested a couple years ago. This was an arrest and tazing that didn’t need to happen; it followed the same script as so many other arrests: someone high on drugs or entitlement refuses to comply even a little bit with simple orders of the police, and things go badly for them. in this case, the ATF agent was high on his sense of overwhelming power… which it turned out he didn’t actually have.
I imagine if State Police or some such start actually arresting the law abiding, various resistance movements will start up that will keep them under surveillance and sic Sheriffs and vigilance committees on them. Real-time monitoring of anyone suspected of trying to enforce the unconstitutional law would seem entirely feasible in this day and age.
Also: virtually all police enjoy “qualified immunity,” which protects them from getting sued when they behave badly. But as I understand it, that immunity goes away if they are doing something unconstitutional. So, ummm… if you are a State Police officer who really doesn’t want to lose his house, his saving and his kids college fund, maybe think twice before violating someones Constitutional rights. Just a thought.
72 hours after the Illinois "assault weapon" and magazine ban bill was signed: https://t.co/IezP9tsHmm
An article by Sandia Labs discussing the disposition of an old, old, OLD Mk 17 nuclear bomb “trainer.” Obviously this isn’t, never was, an actual thermonuclear weapon, but a training device; as such, it doubtless included a lot of the same parts as the actual bomb.
The Mk 17 was a giant of a bomb, deliverable only by the B-36; with a yield of about 15 megatons, it was delivered in 1954, withdrawn from service in 1957. Consequently, this thing is pushing seventy years in age. The article states that it was “transported to Kirtland Air Force Base for its end-of-lifecycle dismantlement and disposition.” One *hopes* that means it’ll be lovingly restored and sent to a good museum for display. One fears it means it’ll be disassembled and scrapped. That *seems* to be its fate based on the vague descriptions of what’ll happen to it.
Finally saw unedited video of the recent shooting of the armed (with a toy gun as it turns out) robber in Texas. With the edited videos, you can’t tell anything about the customer’s shooting of the robber other than at least one shot in the bad guys back. But with the edited video there appear to be *nine* shots, including multiple shots into the guy while he’s down… and a few seconds later, one more shot which kinda seems like it might have been a back-of-the-head shot. Which, you know… maybe a bit much. Do I feel bad that a robber got rubbed out? Not in the slightest. The fact that he had a fake gun doesn’t matter, the *fear* he was determined to generate was real enough. But riddling a dead guy with holes… people are gonna question that. But I dunno: you threaten to kill someone, chances are real good that that *someone* is going to get amped up on adrenaline, and might not be thinking to straight for a minute or three. I know the wokescolds and the prosecutors are going to yammer on about how he shot too many times… but when your life has just been threatened, how rational are you really expected to be?
The greater lesson here: if you don’t want to be turned into Swiss cheese, don’t go robbing people. Seems a simple enough rule of thumb.
Houston Police want to speak this man, but he’s not charged with a crime. HPD says a gunman was robbing people at a taqueria on S. Gessner last night. During the robbery, this man shot and killed the suspect… collected the money, gave it back to the robbery victims, and left. pic.twitter.com/nPtDxw2lQF
A lot of people think that the US is simply throwing money away. These people are wrong.
The majority of the weapons that the US is giving to the Ukrainians are old stock, stuff that would have gone to the incinerator or the scrap heap pretty soon anyway. If you expend a million-dollar weapon that you were otherwise going to simply throw away, you haven’t lost money. But if you expend that weapon for a practical purpose, you not only affect the course of the conflict, you also *learn* things.
The more challenging you try to appear, the more people will challenge you. Armored trains these days seem like the sort of thing that everyone with a surface-to-surface missile, an air-to-surface missile, a drone, a handful of plastic explosive or a cup full of thermite will try their luck at.
She is an *acknowledged* drug-transporting criminal. Whether you agree with Russia’s laws on such things or not, those were the laws. And while the US went to the bizarre extreme of returning to Russia an arms dealer for Griner, the US has done doodly squat for other prisoners currently languishing in Russian penal colonies. Why? because Griner has various and sundry privileges that others don’t. see, for example, Marc Fogel. Very similar circumstances of bringing in a small amount of pot; almost no public outcry, no celebrities or TV NPCs shrieking about how the US needs to bring him back. Why? Feel free to guess.
But hey, at least the Russian get “The Merchant of Death” back.
