search
top

The Threat Profile

I heard from a reader that MoveOn is raising $175,000 for “civil action” on gun control and they are 39% there. I don’t think folks can reasonably say there’s no longer any money in this issue against us. That is changing, and it is very dangerous. We’ve benefitted greatly by our opponents lack of funding in the past decade.

Meanwhile, the Administration is planning an end run around NRA. Sounds like former lobbyist Richard Feldman was at the meeting with Biden, NRA, and the other gun groups. Who Feldman was representing, I don’t know, but he was pre-conceding private sales on behalf of whoever he was there for (probably himself.) I would remind folks that we outlaw private sales of handguns in Pennsylvania, and that hasn’t stopped gun control groups from seeking more restrictions. Why, before we’ve even really locked horns, just concede something out of the gate? Clearly Feldman went to the John Boehner school of negotiation.

26 Responses to “The Threat Profile”

  1. Harold says:

    Wow, read the article; whoever’s side Feldman is on, he has some choice quotes making it crystal clear the Administration is acting in bad faith.

    They really don’t seem to mind that; Chicago politics, I guess. Except the nation isn’t Chicago, heck, even the rest of Illinois is enough to keep Chicago politicians somewhat in check (witness their slagging the Governor’s and then the lame duck’s gun control efforts).

  2. Freiheit says:

    I’m not overly worried about the MoveOn money. NRA got 100k new members in a month, thats like $250k-$350k. Then add in annual dues from the millions of other members, we are strong and well funded.

    The money I’m worried about is Bloomberg and his peers. The ultra rich and Hollywood types can dump money in a hurry into this issue.

    • countertop says:

      This

    • Pyrotek85 says:

      The NRA money seems low, isn’t it like $25 for new members? That’d put it at $2,500,000 at least.

    • Harold says:

      For better or worse, the NRA can’t use much of that money to fight this; hopefully enough of those new members will donate money to the ILA for this battle—they’ll certainly be asked to ^_^.

    • Sigivald says:

      Agreed.

      MoveOn is huge on the Progressive Left, and if that’s all they can raise, they’re bit players.

      That looks more like proof there’s no money there (at least grassroots money), not evidence they’re resurgent…

  3. Matt says:

    I’ve been taking advantage of the round-up option online vendors supply to donate to the NRA-ILA. Kick in $10-15 to the next closest $10 or $20.

    I’m doing my part. Have you?

    • Harold says:

      That certainly doesn’t hurt … but they could use that money today. I’ve been sending my ILA contributions directly to them, as much as I can afford.

  4. Harold says:

    I think the threat profile got a little smaller: pro-Obama anti-coal West Virginia (!) Senator Rockefeller (well, they did define the liberal wing of the party way back when) is going to retire and his seat will be up for grabs in 2014.

    Given all the national Dems have been doing to the state, and the other Senator’s waffling on guns (and using the term clips, showing he’s a poser), that’s a seat not previously in play that Harry Reid has to worry about going Red.

  5. Patrick H says:

    Love this quote:

    “This kind of statement just widens the divide between NRA members, who are quite reasonable people, and the NRA’s lobbyists, who are solely in the business of creating conflict to raise money,” said Mark Glaze, the director of New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s Mayors Against Illegal Guns group.

    They are still pushing the trope that the NRA doesn’t represent its members, despite the 100,000 NEW members who understood what the NRA is doing. Its amazing.

    • Harold says:

      It’s the or akin to the false consciousnesses, What’s the Matter With Kansas (which has now, for the first time, gone solidly conservative :-), argument, they’re really fond of it.

      And they have to make some argument to try to negate the impact of the fact of its 4.1, excuse me, 4.2 million paid members.

      What I find really galling is the “creating conflict to raise money” argument. It implies our resisting the attacks which they started is illegitimate; if you take it far enough, it’s blood libel in that “the NRA” is clearly to blame for Newtown in their world view.

    • Divemedic says:

      To be fair, a lot of NRA members are of the, “I’m a gun owner, and I like to hunt, but…” Variety.

  6. Nathaniel says:

    Just donated $100 to the NRA. Any suggestions for other impactful donations?

    • Freiheit says:

      NRA-ILA – Another arm of the NRA
      SAF – Second Amendment Foundation
      CCRKBA – Another arm of SAF

      Friends of NRA – Charitable arm of NRA womens, youth benefits and grants. Raffles and fun stuff

    • Jake says:

      Find out who your state’s pro-gun lobbying group is, and donate to them. In Virginia it’s the Virginia Citizen’s Defense League (VCDL).

      And watch your state’s legislature, too! The anti-Rights cultists are pushing hard on that front, in addition to the national front.

  7. Dave says:

    Here is a way for the GOP to take this thing and win it.

    1. Introduce a Bill in both the House and Senate that does these things

    A. Compel the DOJ to prosecute all felon in possession cases.
    B. Compel the states to submit mental health records to NICS.
    C. Legalizes Marijuana and taxes it the same as alcohol (18% I think) with the tax dollars funding school security and mental health.

    First, it deals with the failure of the criminal justice system
    Second it deals with the mental health records submissions
    Third, it takes the weed debate out of the Dems hands and now gives everyone a reason to vote for it.

    The GOP can be the rock stars on this issues buy going on the legislative offensive.

    • Jake says:

      They could, but I doubt it. They’re not called the stupid party for nothing. Heck, they’ve already got members talking about caving on magazine restrictions and private sales bans (among other stupidity, like doubling down on Akin’s rape comment).

      As for (C), I see the GOP as more likely to cave on a gun ban than on marijuana legalization.

      • Harold says:

        Worse, he’s a member of the Republican Study Committee (RSC), the official conservative House Republican group.

        Although in all fairness WRT to the Akin’s comment, he’s an OB-GYN and said he was speaking from the direct experience of his patients. And I’ll bet he was asked about it, in the context of his profession, vs. bringing it up out of the blue. You do remember how the whole “Lady Parts” gambit was a media-Democrat (but I repeat myself) conspiracy that started with an out of the blue debate question.

        We’ll see if the Stupid Party ever wises up enough and gets people not from the biased MSM to “moderate” their primary debates.

        • Rob says:

          Although in all fairness WRT to the Akin’s comment, he’s an OB-GYN and said he was speaking from the direct experience of his patients.

          Bullshit. Akin was an engineer, NOT an OB-GYN.

          • Jake says:

            I think he meant that Gingrey (who was talking about Akin’s comment) was an OB-GYN, not Akin.

            Still, the GOP needs to hammer into its people that when anyone asks a question about the subject, they need to just STFU. They tend to get their clocks cleaned anytime they open their mouths about it.

            • Harold says:

              Yes to both your points.

              • Andy says:

                Gingrey is the next district over. He makes me want to scream at the tv sometimes. I have Price, who isn’t much better in some respects, but he hasn’t contracted as much foot-in-mouth disease.

                Go with the army you have, as they say.

    • Sigivald says:

      Problems:

      B) is quite possibly unconstitutional.

      and

      C) is both poison to the GOP base (sadly) and not popular.

      Legalization has only passed in two states – and was soundly defeated in my (fairly Progressively aligned) home, here in Oregon.

      If the only states that can get popular support to legalize dope are Washington and Colorado, the GOP will quite reasonably conclude that the issue is not popular enough to support against the will of the party base.

      Hell, it’s a great idea that even the Democrats won’t touch.

      (And that’s why I voted for Gary Johnson…)

      • Dave says:

        I spent six years working for the court system. We(taxpayers) spent nearly $10k to prosecute a simple possession case. It makes no sense at all. It’s a waste of time, money, and resources. So instead of the police focusing on violent crime they’re spending time in courtrooms for what seems like endless number of hearings until a case reaches final disposition.

top