Once again, GOA is off its rocker, this time on the federal land bill. They are quite correct to raise concerns about the status of carrying firearms for self-defense on all this new federal land and wilderness area, a concern that is shared by NRA. But I find this passage in their press release unproductive and divisive:
That’s right. Many Congressmen claimed to be protecting the Second Amendment, when all they were really doing was thumbing their noses at self defense.
Here is the entire “pro-gun” amendment that was considered in the House. Judge for yourself if this really protects your Second Amendment rights:
“Nothing in this Title shall be construed as affecting the authority, jurisdiction, or responsibility of the several States to manage, control, or regulate fish and resident wildlife under State law or regulations, including the regulation of hunting, fishing, trapping, and recreational shooting. Nothing in this Title shall be construed as limiting access for hunting, fishing, trapping, or recreational shooting.”
They may as well have called it the “Elmer Fudd Protection Act.”
A lot of people who voted for this bill campaigned for office as champions of gun rights. They said “Send me to Washington; I’ll fight for the Second Amendment.”
And this is what we get? Pathetic.
And with that, you can hear the anti-gunners and HSUS salivate with anticipation as the gun rights community once again turns on itself. The proposed language was by NRA and GOA A rated Congressman Jason Altmire. The same Jason Almire who went to bat trying to get the repeal of DC’s gun laws through Congress. The same Jason Altmire who helped form a Second Amendment Task Force in Congress on the heels of Holder calling for a new Assault Weapons Ban.
Could it be, rather than Congressman Altmire being “pathetic,” he was attempting to help an important constituency, namely hunters and recreational shooters. Helping them alleviate at least some of the concerns about the federal land bill if it had passed. Given that it passed by two votes, I’m going to guess a lot of our friends in Congress were concerned that it would, in fact, pass, and pass without any pro-gun language in it whatsoever.
Are we to believe that GOA does not consider hunters and recreational shooters an important constituency, and would rather a bill pass without addressing any concerns? Is GOA agreeing we should throw the “Elmer Fudds” off the lifeboats? Their language certainly indicates that. It’s one thing to be disappointed that you didn’t get everything you wanted, but we would have at least gotten something if the Democrats had made up those two votes and passed the bill. GOA would seem to prefer we got nothing.
It’s garbage like this that makes me unable to take GOA seriously as a gun rights organization. GOA has always seemed to me to be more interested in feathering its nest as the expense of other groups and other concerns within the community than it is with actually helping pick up the ball and move it forward. Until that changes, I’m going to continue speaking out against their divisiveness.
