<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: What Are The Bradys Up To?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.pagunblog.com/2009/11/13/what-are-the-bradys-up-to/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.pagunblog.com/2009/11/13/what-are-the-bradys-up-to/</link>
	<description>The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State ...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 08:20:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: windex1</title>
		<link>http://www.pagunblog.com/2009/11/13/what-are-the-bradys-up-to/#comment-52987</link>
		<dc:creator>windex1</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 06:53:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=14263#comment-52987</guid>
		<description>Won&#039;t incorporation make it easier to pass reasonable national gun control measures?  Suddenly, that gunshow loophole starts looking a lot smaller....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Won&#8217;t incorporation make it easier to pass reasonable national gun control measures?  Suddenly, that gunshow loophole starts looking a lot smaller&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John K.</title>
		<link>http://www.pagunblog.com/2009/11/13/what-are-the-bradys-up-to/#comment-52972</link>
		<dc:creator>John K.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 15 Nov 2009 17:35:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=14263#comment-52972</guid>
		<description>I agree with RAH. Sure, our side may be more passionate and we have the constitution on our side but let&#039;s not forget two things:

1. These people are pros. I can&#039;t really blame Sarah Brady personally too much because she obviously believes this is her calling. But that&#039;s what makes them effective. This isn&#039;t just another issue to these people, like it is to many liberals. This is their only issue. This is simply not something they will give up, period. They may lay low for a while but they will definitely be back.

2. They don&#039;t need restrictions to effectively make owning a gun cost prohibitive for many people. We obviously care about the RKBA but most regular gun owners don&#039;t. It&#039;s just something they take for granted. Everybody here knows about the $200 ATF tax stamp and it&#039;s not the $200 that are the issue for most of us - it&#039;s the jumping through hoops and endless paperwork for something as mundane as a SBR. Now, adjust those $200 in 1968 money to 2009 and that comes out to be just a bit more than $1230! And all it takes is a couple of changes that may easily get passed as &quot;reasonable gun control measures&quot; in the aftermath of the next terrorist attack - oh, sorry, I guess we&#039;re not using that word any more since we can&#039;t call a spade a spade these days.

Folks, let&#039;s not underestimate these people. They have been doing this for decades.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with RAH. Sure, our side may be more passionate and we have the constitution on our side but let&#8217;s not forget two things:</p>
<p>1. These people are pros. I can&#8217;t really blame Sarah Brady personally too much because she obviously believes this is her calling. But that&#8217;s what makes them effective. This isn&#8217;t just another issue to these people, like it is to many liberals. This is their only issue. This is simply not something they will give up, period. They may lay low for a while but they will definitely be back.</p>
<p>2. They don&#8217;t need restrictions to effectively make owning a gun cost prohibitive for many people. We obviously care about the RKBA but most regular gun owners don&#8217;t. It&#8217;s just something they take for granted. Everybody here knows about the $200 ATF tax stamp and it&#8217;s not the $200 that are the issue for most of us &#8211; it&#8217;s the jumping through hoops and endless paperwork for something as mundane as a SBR. Now, adjust those $200 in 1968 money to 2009 and that comes out to be just a bit more than $1230! And all it takes is a couple of changes that may easily get passed as &#8220;reasonable gun control measures&#8221; in the aftermath of the next terrorist attack &#8211; oh, sorry, I guess we&#8217;re not using that word any more since we can&#8217;t call a spade a spade these days.</p>
<p>Folks, let&#8217;s not underestimate these people. They have been doing this for decades.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RAH</title>
		<link>http://www.pagunblog.com/2009/11/13/what-are-the-bradys-up-to/#comment-52968</link>
		<dc:creator>RAH</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 15 Nov 2009 16:21:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=14263#comment-52968</guid>
		<description>Brady was successful in derailing the guns in Nat&#039;l parks. Then they  lost  when Congress attacthed the amendment and was signed by  Obama.

 I agree that  Brady believes that incorporation is going to succeed and do not want to be on the losing  side. They  are repositioning with restrictions rather than that the 2A doesn&#039;t exist as pre Heller and that  is doesn&#039;t applied against the states which is pre McDonald.

The question for gun controll is where they can nibble on the fringes. Micro stamping, ammo restrictions,  one a  month,  report  stolen guns those are the avenues they have been pursuing. 

 That  and any thing  esle they dan think of.

 The most onerouse restriction is to ban private sales with  requirement of background check or the gun show loophole.

 The green  attack on lead is another.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Brady was successful in derailing the guns in Nat&#8217;l parks. Then they  lost  when Congress attacthed the amendment and was signed by  Obama.</p>
<p> I agree that  Brady believes that incorporation is going to succeed and do not want to be on the losing  side. They  are repositioning with restrictions rather than that the 2A doesn&#8217;t exist as pre Heller and that  is doesn&#8217;t applied against the states which is pre McDonald.</p>
<p>The question for gun controll is where they can nibble on the fringes. Micro stamping, ammo restrictions,  one a  month,  report  stolen guns those are the avenues they have been pursuing. </p>
<p> That  and any thing  esle they dan think of.</p>
<p> The most onerouse restriction is to ban private sales with  requirement of background check or the gun show loophole.</p>
<p> The green  attack on lead is another.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Carl from Chicago</title>
		<link>http://www.pagunblog.com/2009/11/13/what-are-the-bradys-up-to/#comment-52953</link>
		<dc:creator>Carl from Chicago</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 15 Nov 2009 01:39:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=14263#comment-52953</guid>
		<description>They know that siding with Chicago&#039;s ban is a losing proposition.  Thus, I would venture to guess they will simply file a brief outlining their arguments for guns as a social cost.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>They know that siding with Chicago&#8217;s ban is a losing proposition.  Thus, I would venture to guess they will simply file a brief outlining their arguments for guns as a social cost.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: elmo iscariot</title>
		<link>http://www.pagunblog.com/2009/11/13/what-are-the-bradys-up-to/#comment-52914</link>
		<dc:creator>elmo iscariot</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 18:29:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=14263#comment-52914</guid>
		<description>I assume they&#039;re just making sure their names are on the process (like Thirdpower said--&quot;we&#039;re relevant!&quot;), but know the Court&#039;s very likely to rule to incorporate.  They don&#039;t want to support incorporation, don&#039;t want to have to backpedal again like they did in Heller, and don&#039;t want to stay silent.  The only alternative left is to reply without saying anything.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I assume they&#8217;re just making sure their names are on the process (like Thirdpower said&#8211;&#8221;we&#8217;re relevant!&#8221;), but know the Court&#8217;s very likely to rule to incorporate.  They don&#8217;t want to support incorporation, don&#8217;t want to have to backpedal again like they did in Heller, and don&#8217;t want to stay silent.  The only alternative left is to reply without saying anything.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Thirdpower</title>
		<link>http://www.pagunblog.com/2009/11/13/what-are-the-bradys-up-to/#comment-52904</link>
		<dc:creator>Thirdpower</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 16:56:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=14263#comment-52904</guid>
		<description>We&#039;re the Brady Campaign.

Please pay attention to us.  We&#039;re still relevant.  Really we are.

Please? 

Anyone?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We&#8217;re the Brady Campaign.</p>
<p>Please pay attention to us.  We&#8217;re still relevant.  Really we are.</p>
<p>Please? </p>
<p>Anyone?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: doubleplusundead</title>
		<link>http://www.pagunblog.com/2009/11/13/what-are-the-bradys-up-to/#comment-52901</link>
		<dc:creator>doubleplusundead</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 16:49:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=14263#comment-52901</guid>
		<description>The Brady Campaign has completely collapsed as an organization, MAIG is the one we need to worry about now.  If I had to guess, Brady fades away in ten to fifteen years, MAIG will draft whoever they think will be useful to them from what&#039;s left of Brady, and Brady dissolves or maintains a token presence.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Brady Campaign has completely collapsed as an organization, MAIG is the one we need to worry about now.  If I had to guess, Brady fades away in ten to fifteen years, MAIG will draft whoever they think will be useful to them from what&#8217;s left of Brady, and Brady dissolves or maintains a token presence.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Melancton Smith</title>
		<link>http://www.pagunblog.com/2009/11/13/what-are-the-bradys-up-to/#comment-52893</link>
		<dc:creator>Melancton Smith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 16:00:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=14263#comment-52893</guid>
		<description>Ok, I misread what you wrote.  They are still filing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ok, I misread what you wrote.  They are still filing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Melancton Smith</title>
		<link>http://www.pagunblog.com/2009/11/13/what-are-the-bradys-up-to/#comment-52892</link>
		<dc:creator>Melancton Smith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 15:58:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=14263#comment-52892</guid>
		<description>Probably they can&#039;t afford to file a brief in a losing battle.  I think you need about $15,000 aside from paying the lawyer(s).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Probably they can&#8217;t afford to file a brief in a losing battle.  I think you need about $15,000 aside from paying the lawyer(s).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

