Month: March 2011

Adam Serwer of The Washington Post’s blog “Plum Line,” is more right than wrong in regards to his latest post on Obama’s wading into the gun issue. Top down leadership is not going to work on this issue because the gun control community consists of a very small number of people, most of whom have lost loved ones to criminal violence or suicides involving guns. They don’t have the community we’ve developed after three decades of being, pardon the pun, under the gun. Because of that, we can create a backlash at the voting booth the other side has no hope of accomplishing. Politicians know that.

But I notice Adam Serwer making some of the same mistakes that a lot of journalists make, in that they aren’t looking at the details, and even if they are, I doubt they understand the issue well enough to realize what could be transpiring. Take, for instance, all the easter eggs that are in Schumer’s bill that supposedly is only about improving the background checks. We’re not fanning the flames of paranoid just because it suits us.

This is a classic tactic of our opponents. Look for common ground that’s reasonable, that everyone can agree with, then put a thing or two in there that takes just a little more ground than we’re willing to give. When Second Amendment advocates balk, scream loudly to the media and anyone else who will listen, how unreasonable and extreme we are to oppose such reasonable measures. This has happened again, again, and again, and the media can be counted on not to report or understand either the easter eggs, or to take our arguments against the proposals seriously.

There is no more desire on the other side’s part to settle this political issue than there is on ours, and the root cause of that is the status-quo is unacceptable to both gun rights advocates and gun control advocates. There’s no middle ground on this issue that will make our opponents surrender and give up. That’s why I’m interested in giving up as little as possible, and taking everything from them that I can. I’m not in this fight to keep people worried. I’m in this fight to win, and to make what my opponents advocate about as publicly acceptable as someone who thinks we ought to ban newspapers.

Joe Biden is taking part in the discussions with gun control groups:

[T]hose in attendance were pleased to see Biden emissaries at the table, interpreting it as a sign of seriousness on the administration’s behalf.

“We have had other meetings with folks at justice and meetings with other people in the administration,” said one attendee. “This was the most thorough engagement we have had to date.”

They might be serious about doing something. Biden’s presence would suggest the Administration is serious, and the President wants to distance himself from it.

“It struck me that they were looking for a broad range of ideas,” said Helmke. “That they hadn’t decided on any proposals or written anything off.”

We need to be ready, and if Obama pulls the trigger, we need to fight like hell to get him replaced in 2012.

From Tom King, President of the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association:

Ladies and Gentlemen,

There has been a blatant attempt by NYC to confiscate pre ban magazines that are legally possessed by resident pistol permit holders by threatening non renewal of their permit if the magazines are not disposed of to the approval of the NYC Police Department. If you have received one of these letters threatening non renewal please contact me at tking at nysrpa dot org.

Thank you,
Tom King

Keep going Mayor Mike. Keep going. It’s going to make the open carry parade through Civic Center, Manhattan that much more sweet when we restore the Second Amendment to your city. I know I have a fair number of readers in New York City, so if you have encountered this, please contact Tom.

UPDATE: Copy of the letter.

Sadly it does not also include “Prevent the BATFE from assisting criminals trafficking firearms,” but we’ll take it, regardless. In what should be of interest to your NFA folks:

Allow importation and transfer of new machineguns by firearm and ammunition manufacturers for use in developing or testing firearms and ammunition, and training customers. In particular, ammunition manufacturers fulfilling government contracts need to ensure that their ammunition works reliably. H.R. 1093 would also provide for the transfer and possession of new machineguns by professional film and theatrical organizations.

This is obviously not a repeal of Hughes, but it’s one chip. While this won’t directly affect ordinary Joes, it will indirectly affect them, because the organizations that this does affect will no longer be competing in the transferable market. In fact, many of them will likely dump their expensive transferable inventory and replace it with cheaper and newer inventory. In short, this will take some of the pressure off prices for pre-86 machineguns.

He’s going to hold his gun summit without representation from NRA. It should be interesting to see what comes out of this. As USA Today notes:

Given its political and financial strength, the NRA is probably in a position to block any new gun legislation, especially in the Republican-run House.

White House Spokesman Jay Carney said the word “common sense” so often that I cam promise you whatever comes from this won’t be good. Fortunately, USA Today is probably right.