search
top

Over the Weekend …

one more Republican endorsed limits on magazine capacity. For those of you who don’t subscribe, she said “The Republican Party will not go to the wall to┬ádefend extended clips,” and given support for this concept from people like Lugar and Cheney, I can’t say I feel particularly good she’s mistaken.

This makes me wonder if the folks who called NRA’s Grassroots line to complain about NRA’s support for pro-gun Democrats will now call and apologize? The GOP has always taken us for granted. Where are all the GOP leaders rallying and showing their support for gun rights and opposition to any new gun controls? Boehner, to his credit, has said he’s not going to move gun control bills, but where are all the rest of the GOP stalwarts? Where are all the voices who were quick to jump all over NRA for the DISCLOSE deal spreading the word about exactly what McCarthy’s magazine ban will do?

I don’t think the GOP has ever been ideologically committed to this fight. To be fair, I don’t think the Democrats are either, but the Democrats had better incentives, and that’s what matters.

13 Responses to “Over the Weekend …”

  1. It is interesting to read the comments. When I looked yesterday, Noonan’s nonsense had 615 comments which ran 10-1 against her position.

    It is important to remember that Peggy Noonan has been one of Obama’s biggest Republican supporters on the WSJ editorial page which puts her at odds with most of the rest.

  2. Dave says:

    Hey if the republicans successfully throw us under the bus on this issue. I’ll start voting democrat, out of spite. I’ve joked that the country is turning in to a version of England with guns and NASCAR but if my choice is just NASCAR I’ll vote D all the way. And I’ll laugh in the face of those RINO’s when they bitch about some right of theirs not being respected.

  3. dusty says:

    “Where are all the GOP leaders rallying and showing their support for gun rights and opposition to any new gun controls?”

    Is there any NRA-backed Democrat voicing support for our gun rights, and opposing the ban? If so, linking to their public statement would greatly bolster this post.

    If no NRA-backed democrat steps forward, will NRA remember in 2012?

  4. DirtCrashr says:

    So NRA doesn’t stand for National Republican Army? I hope to hell Noonan is talking out her ass.

  5. Sage Thrasher says:

    “…given support for this concept from people like Lugar and Cheney…”

    Statistically speaking, I’d wager you’re more likely to get shot by a hunting partner with a long gun who throws back a beer or two with lunch than by a crazed loner with a high capacity clip. I’m still waiting to hear Cheney weigh in on THAT.

  6. Wolfwood says:

    Eh, is this really news? We always knew that there are plenty of establishment Republicans who are neither especially conservative nor especially libertarian. This is especially true in the Senate. So long as our side has enough votes to prevent further erosion, that might be enough for now. We’ve got state legislatures overturning various anti-gun statutes, plus a SCOTUS that seems to be (reluctantly) ruling in our favor. As much as I’d like to see NFA eliminated and the ATF prevented from unreasonably limiting imports, we probably don’t have the votes to do either one. We probably do have the votes on our reconquista of things like open carry in Florida, concealed carry in Wisconsin, and restaurant carry in several states.

    Let’s keep hitting their weak spots and then move from a position of strength. Right now we’re seeing a shocking level of “eh” from the public regarding magazine capacity that would’ve been unthinkable a decade ago. The anti-gun groups are nearly dead.

  7. Wolfwood says:

    This might also be a healthy amount of venting that is good for our side. Not all of our allies are going to agree with us all the time, and we’ve been playing defense so long and on so many things that some of them are surely feeling resentful at having to take one for the team. The magazine capacity issue is going to fizzle out before too long. With this bit of maverick-ism out of their system, perhaps some can be persuaded to vote our way on measures where they might otherwise dig in their heels.

    After all, if we keep too tight of a grip then inevitably some systems are going to slip through our fingers.

  8. Jeff Dege says:

    What the GOP never seems to remember is that the gun nuts aren’t motivated by anything else, and they have very long memories.

    The beltway insiders think that they can vote anti-gun now, and then after the storm has passed they can vote pro-gun and redeem themselves.

    It’s true that this sort of finesse will often convince the NRA to get behind them – but it won’t work with the folks I talk to at gun shows.

    Lee Atwater once told Bush 41 that it was OK to screw the gun guys, because where else would they go?

    Come election day, they went hunting. And Bush discovered that he couldn’t win without them. In 2000, I was still hearing about how we couldn’t trust Bush43, because of what his father had done in 1984.

    If the GOP screws up this one, they’ll lose in 2012, regardless of how pro-gun their speeches in their campaigns.

  9. DirtCrashr says:

    OTOH – Nine Texas Democrats switch to the GOP – and those tend to be pro-gun types. They’re all from Lamar County.

  10. mobo says:

    “Normal people are afraid of nuts with guns.”

    What nonsense. It’s always the same people who say this who are quick to point out that we’re overreacting to the threat of being blown up in a terrorist attack. Michael Moore comes to mind right off the top of my head. I happen to agree with Michael Moore that you’re about as likely to be struck by lightning as you are to get killed in a terrorist attack, but I’m consistent and believe the same holds true for mass shootings.

    If the chance of being blown up by a suicide bomber is so remote, then so is the probability that I will be a victim of a mass shooting.

    If you live in a city, I’d say you have pretty close to a 100% chance that you will encounter violent thugs at some point in your life. I’m 34 and I’ve had several before my 18th birthday. The chance that you will need a firearm to defend yourself against muggers, especially in an urban area, is far greater than the chance that you will be present during a random mass shooting.

    Normal people fear muggers, burglars, carjackers, etc., because these are the real threats that most normal people usually face at least once in their lives.

  11. Maxpwr says:

    This magazine ban would collapse the full auto/Class 3 market overnight.

  12. Sebastian says:

    It seriously would, because you couldn’t transfer any of the magazines, even though you could transfer the gun. Same for belt fed machine guns. This is, essentially, a ban on machine guns.

  13. Brad says:

    Good grief. Noonan has been conned into thinking the Clinton AW ban would have prevented Laugner from getting a 33 round mag. Ugh. What a fool.

    “What civilian needs a pistol with a magazine that loads 33 bullets and allows you to kill that many people without even stopping to reload? No one but people with bad intent. Those clips were banned once; the president should call for reimposing the ban.”

top