99 Votes

99 votes needed to win, 99 votes needed, get off your butt & help us out, 98 votes needed to win.
98 votes needed to win, 98 votes needed, get off your butt & help us out, 97 votes needed to win.
97 votes needed to win, 97 votes needed, get off your butt & help us out, 96 votes needed to win.
96 votes needed to win, 96 votes needed, get off your butt & help us out, 95 votes needed to win.
95 votes needed to win, 95 votes needed, get off your butt & help us out, 94 votes needed to win.

Get the hint, folks?

It appears as though we have a CeaseFire/Brady/Bloomberg lovin’ candidate who kept his seat by just 99 votes. We didn’t know until today because of the process needed to count absentees. It may be close enough to trigger a recount, but both sides seem to believe it’s going to have the same final result.

For the gun owners in the district who got the personal emails asking them to give just a couple of hours of time, enjoy your anti-gun representative who doesn’t even believe you have the right to defend your life & family on your porch or outside of your home. For Adam Z., THANK YOU for driving out of your own home district to come help out.

94 votes needed to win, 94 votes needed, get off your butt & help us out, 93 votes needed to win.
93 votes needed to win, 93 votes needed, get off your butt & help us out, 92 votes needed to win.
92 votes needed to win, 92 votes needed, get off your butt & help us out, 91 votes needed to win.
91 votes needed to win, 91 votes needed, get off your butt & help us out, 90 votes needed to win.

When Not Being a Criminal is a Problem

Last night, we caught an episode of Border Wars that just really set me off. Most of the folks they featured were caught crossing illegally, and it was pretty obvious. Their documents were either clearly faked, their behavior/clothing/attitude was so off that anyone with common sense would agree there was something worth checking, or they were caught in the act of sneaking across illegally. Yay, we like when law enforcement does a good job of catching those folks.

But then one guy pulled up in his car. He was an American citizen coming back into the country, and they pulled him out of line for a search because his car had some scratches on it and he looked a bit stiff. They pulled in a drug dog who may have possibly smelled something, but it wasn’t a hard hit. They pulled up the carpet, got under the car, yanked everything out, and went through to read any and all papers he had in the vehicle. No sign of any drugs, no indication that the car had been altered to hide drugs, no hit on the person. Nothing. And they were clearly frustrated. Then, one of the officers found a copy of a warrant. They called up to the local authorities who issued the warrant, and they confirmed that the guy had come in, the legal issue was resolved, and he was not wanted for any crime whatsoever. While all of this was going on, the citizen was being detained in their offices. The golden moment came when a supervisor came out and shared in his frustration at not being able to charge him with anything. When the officer doing the search closed up the car and officially declared it clean, the supervisor sighed and said, “Well, you win some, you lose some.”

EXCUSE ME?!?!?!? What fucked up view of the law do you have to have when finding an American citizen who hasn’t committed a crime is a sign of a bad day, and considered “losing some”? Does someone need to head down there with a gentle clue bat reminder that Americans are innocent until proven guilty? And if car scratches and being uncomfortable around officers who view people as guilty until innocent are all the evidence you need of wrongdoing, then I’m sure I should be hauled off.

So, even though there could be more at issue than what’s in the article, my outrage meter has already been set to “OMG – Fire them!” for the week when I read about a case in Philly that involves the police taking guns & licenses off a guy.

On two afternoons in a row last week, Solomon, 24, was arrested after hanging out at a North Philadelphia bus stop, and each time, the cops confiscated from him a legally owned gun and a separate license to carry a gun, the licensed security guard said yesterday.

“They locked me up for loitering at a bus stop,” said Solomon, who has a special concealed-carry permit for security-training officers and one of the controversial gun permits issued by Florida. “And they took my guns away.”

Police think that Solomon was being insolent and used poor judgment, including by showing up armed at the same bus stop at which he was arrested the previous day.

“If he’s that defiant, should this guy have a gun?” said Sgt. Ray Evers, a police spokesman. “The most uncommon human trait is common sense. He’s not using good, adult judgment.”

First, let’s take issue with a cop who classifies the most rare trait in all of humanity as common sense. There’s a reason it’s called common sense. It’s pretty common. If you think it’s the most rare of all traits, then I do believe that means you may be the one lacking it.

Second, would you like to know what Solomon was doing that is considered a violation of this most rare and precious trait we call common sense? Standing at a bus stop. Waiting on a bus. Is it really defiance to continue to wait on a bus? Police say that because he let some busses go by, he was suspicious. That might be the case. But, if his version is remotely true, not unreasonable. He says that the first couple of busses were loaded with kids because school just let out, and he didn’t want to be on a bus full of kids. As someone who recently spent 6 hours surrounded by misbehaving kids on a plane, I’m not going to condemn that judgement. If I had time on my hands, I’d consider waiting for another bus, too. Again, not an unreasonable position.

But, it gets better.

Solomon, of Germantown, an independent contractor who works with the Parapet Group, a security and law-enforcement training company, said he was taken into custody and held for seven hours. He said city police confiscated his gun and his Act 235 license, issued by State Police to security-training officers.

Solomon had received that same gun back one week earlier, after petitioning the courts for months to return it. The gun had been confiscated when he was a passenger during a 2009 car stop, he said, adding that he was never charged in that case. …

[In the latest incident, Solomon] was again taken into custody and held for six hours. He said he received a property receipt for his gun, but not his permit. He was not charged with a crime, according to online court records.

Evers said that Solomon has been “evasive and uncooperative” and that police had every right to take his guns and permits.

So they can’t find anything to charge him with, but they keep taking his guns and permits. More importantly, he’s having to go through legal hassles to get his guns back months after the incidents. I consider myself close to quite a few police officers, so I feel bad highlighting the negative ones in their ranks, but my Lord. Just because a person doesn’t do what you want, doesn’t mean you get to take the gun. You might have a bad feeling about someone, but that doesn’t make them a criminal. You have to do the job of finding evidence and pressing charges, and you know, that crazy process of convicting a person. It’s what our judicial system was founded upon, and our rights should be respected until a person is proven guilty.

Why the Poor Senate Showing?

It’s hard to argue the GOP didn’t fall down a bit in the Senate races. In the races the GOP did win, the margins were closer than many of the House races, and in the ones they lost they lost pretty substantially. Jim Geraghty argues that it might have to do with the quality of candidates, a sentiment echoed by Michael Barone in the Washington Examiner. I tend to think this is a correct analysis, largely driven by the fact that the structure of the Tea Party movement. When it comes to Congressional Districts, most seem to have only one or two Tea Party groups, who presumably don’t find it too difficult to coordinate on local races, like a House race. The Tea Party movement at the local level have some defined structure, and look more like traditional political civic groups. But take that out to a statewide race and the Tea Party starts to look more like a mob than an organization. As our Founding Fathers were aware, mobs seldom make prudent choices.

Choices like Angle and O’Donnell, are examples of this, though there are many more. None of these candidates to me looked like winners. The big unknown question was how far could Tea Party enthusiasm take lackluster candidates in state wide races. The answer would appear to be not very far. This isn’t surprising considering Tea Party supporters only make up about 30% of the population. It doesn’t change the fundamental dynamic that you still have to build a coalition to win.

Choosing the right candidate is difficult when you’re an organic movement, made up of people who normally don’t participate in the political process. Organic movements are going to gravitate towards candidates based on ideological compatibility, rather than their ability to actually run a statewide campaign and win. When assessing the viability of a candidate’s political potential for federal office, I’m only looking at a couple of factors in order of importance:

  1. His or her ability to raise money.
  2. His or her ability to manage a campaign, or hire the right people to do it (see above)
  3. His or her ability to connect with ordinary Americans who are not ideological in their political preferences.
  4. His or her values in comparison to the voters they will be going before.

For a state level or local race, fundraising can drop in importance, depending on the district. A candidate that’s willing to go knock on thousands of doors, and has a way with people, can overcome a fundraising deficit in a local race. There are plenty of politicians in state and local offices who are dogged campaigners, but can’t raise money worth a damn when they try to move to a higher level office. That’s one reason, as much as I love Sam Rohrer, I didn’t think his candidacy had a chance. Look at any race, and how or why they lose comes down to one or more of these issues. When I’m looking at a candidate in a primary race, I’m only looking for someone who’s ideology roughly matches up with my own. I’m more interested in someone that can win in the district they are running in. Depending on the district, this is either going to mean high ideological compatibility, or having to pick a few issues of importance and compromising on the rest. In Delaware, Nevada, and many other places, Tea Party backers needed more of the latter and less of the former. I think the organic nature of the Tea Party movement is going to mean they get it wrong in state wide races just about as often as they get it right. How one could improve candidate selection, without destroying the grassroots nature of the movement,  is an interesting question.

Harry Reid’s Survival

Reid coasted to an easy five point victory over Sharon Angle, and as predicted, the GOP failed to win control of the Senate. The Democrats have 51 firm seats as of now, and look to pick up another two. Prospects for the Senate were grim the moment that O’Donnell defeated Castle in the Delaware Primary, and Lisa Murkowski announced a write-in campaign.

This leaves Reid still Majority Leader in the Senate, and to be honest, that’s the best outcome for us. This prevents Durbin or Schumer becoming majority leader. A great many conservatives were upset by NRA’s refusal to endorse Sharon Angle, but I think it’s hard to argue they made a poor strategic decision by sitting this one out. Reid probably would have won the day regardless, and now we at least have a majority leader we can hopefully still work with.

Declaring Victory

I said last night that the Bradys were sure to react to the elections by declaring victory, just like with Heller and McDonald. Here’s the declaration. Dave Kopel takes a more serious look at how this election fared for the Second Amendment. Last night may not have been the best of nights for NRA’s win-percentage, but it was still a good night for the Second Amendment.

Hope and Change Visualized

First, we had hope, and it looked like this:

Last night the voters of the Philadelphia Suburbs voted for change:

This looks more like the map I grew up with. I would note that each of those blue going red districts was an anti-gun Democrat being replaced by a pro-gun Republican. In addition, the Republican seats we held in the suburbs are solid. Allyson Schwartz, who’s district includes Philadelphia and heads out into Montgomery County, is the only gun hater left in the Philly suburbs. And this is where Bloomberg made his stand, dumped big money, and lost just as big. They tried to make gun control an issue and roundly lost.

UPDATE: That finger of blue coming down out of Berks County in the Northwest corner of this map? That’s Tim Holden’s district. Holden voted against Pelosi every step of the way, ran as a conservative rather than a Democrat, and carried an NRA endorsement. He’s a DINO.

North Carolina Victories

John Richardson points out that in the whole NRA v. GRNC dustup, it ended up a draw in terms of who actually won, but the important thing is that the North Carolina General Assembly and Senate are now in Republican hands. Hopefully this means when NRA goes back to Charlotte, we can actually carry.

Illinois Guv Race Close

Thirdpower reports on the Illinois results. It’s too close to call between Bill Brady and Pat Quinn. If we win this, we might get concealed carry and preemption in Illinois. My understanding is this will fix Chicago’s gun laws. Keep your fingers crossed. We could set gun control back a decade with this win.

Advice to Tenneesse Gunnies They Probably Don’t Need

Bill Haslam won. and won big, despite the dustup over his announced support for Constitutional Carry. Whether that was a publicity stunt or not, he has opened the door. His landslide win over Democratic Challenger McWherter brings a lot of electoral credibility to Constitutional Carry in Tennessee. It needs to be pushed, and pushed big, because it would be a huge boost to the movement. Hell, it could be the point where we can say Constitutional Carry is a movement, and not just a peculiar feature of three overwhelmingly pro-gun states. Being in the heart of the South, and the first state east of the Mississippi to consider such a measure (Vermont has always been this way), it would be a tremendous win.

Haslam’s landslide is a mandate. Don’t squander it. I’m hoping NRA hears this clearest of all. This doesn’t mean we’ll win, or that it can be done, but I think it should be tried. Make Haslam live up to his word. He opened this door, and I don’t see any reason not to try to walk through it.