2011 – Page 139 – Shall Not Be Questioned

Are We Better Off Without ATF?

Robert Farago of Truth About Guns thinks ATF has seen better days. I think a lot of gun owners would come to regret this, to be honest. Why? Let me outline some points to think about:

We’ve gone through the trouble to get ATF appointment to be subject to Senatorial confirmation. We’ve been able to block Andrew Traver as a result of that. If ATF is eliminated, enforcement of gun laws will fall to the FBI. Our ability to block an anti-gun FBI Director will be nearly non-existent, because FBI has such broad responsibility. There’s no special interests that are too worried people will start moonshining and smuggling cigarettes in the absence of an ATF Director. Lots of other interests are going to get real uppity if you hamstring the FBI.
ATF are the Barny Fifes of federal law enforcement. The media doesn’t take them too seriously, or pay much attention to them. Congress does not take them very seriously. Other federal law enforcement doesn’t take them very seriously. On the other hand, the FBI has a very good reputation. Congress will listen to the FBI.
ATF is stretched thin on resources, and have been for some time. This limits their ability to harass otherwise law abiding people with federal gun laws. Sure, ATF does this sometimes, but the FBI currently views guns as an ancillary mission. We’re not going to screw with FBI’s funding like we can ATF.
Remember that the FBI was secretly keeping NICS data for years during the Clinton Administration. They are probably still doing it. Usually when ATF makes an aggressive move, it’s done with such bumbling incompetence that a scandal usually quickly ensues. The FBI will screw us in ways we probably won’t even realize, and even when we do realize, they’ll probably get away with it.

So this is another bandwagon I’m not going to get on, at least not unless we can seriously repeal a lot of federal gun laws. It might not seem like it sometimes, but the ATF wolf has largely been caged over the past couple of decades, mostly through appropriations riders, the agency’s own poor reputation, and subjecting the director to confirmation by the Senate. The FBI is a wolf we’re not going to cage, and that wolf has enough fox in him to be dangerous.

Hard to Argue

Tam notes:

Sorry, we’ve toppled our quota of genocidal Arab dictators for the decade and have had to listen to everybody tell us what jerks we were for doing it. Let Sarkozy show Kha… Qa… Gaddafi someÂ choc et effroi.

I’m pretty far from a non-interventionist libertarian, and Obama’s foreign policy has been nearly everything I feared it would be. But the reaction of the European powers to our non-response to the Libya crisis has made me think Barry is crazy like a fox. I’m tired of carrying the defense burden for the entire free world, and having the dead and wounded soldiers prove it. The Europeans, at a combined economy of 16 trillion, had better start getting off their asses and pitching in. They have the money. They have the manpower. But why spend the money on tanks, planes, aircraft carriers and destroyers when the US was willing to do everything for them? This ought to be a wakeup call to the Europeans. Uncle Sam isn’t always going to be around to pull your butts from the fire, especially not at 14.2 trillion and counting.

Nuclear Boy

I’m guessing this is the Japanese way of explaining to kids what’s been going on at Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant:

Non Profit Salaries

It’s a slow day, so I don’t have much else to write, other than pick on Joan Peterson. Amid a steady stream of hysteria about how we don’t care about gun violence (kind of an odd assertion, when I carry a Glock specifically to prevent violence, gun or otherwise, against me and those around me. What does she think I carry it for? To tickle the unicorns?)Â we have her cite something from Michael Moore:

Itâ€™s about scoring political points and protecting LaPierreâ€™s status as the 4th highest paid leader of any â€œcharity organizationâ€ in the country, to the tune of a cool $1.281 million per year. And fear of Obama, the first black President, has been very, very good for fundraising and scaring middle-aged white men into stocking their basements with caches of weapons. Which means itâ€™s also been very, very good for LaPierreâ€™s bottom line, and that of the arms dealers who sit on the NRAâ€™s Board.

Moore is a well documented liar, first of all. Second of all, NRA is not a charity. NRA has a charity, called the NRA Foundation. The Foundation does not directly compensate Wayne. He is paid by NRA, which is a 501(c)(4) non-profit, and therefore not a charity. NRA Foundation is a four star charity. By comparison, The Brady Center is a two star charity.Â Helmke’s $243,888 salary is compensated directly from the Center, and represents 6.33% of its total expenses. Paul draws no salary from the 501(c)(4), the Brady Campaign, which by now is very nearly defunct. The Brady Campaign and Brady Center only employ approximately 52 people. There seems to be a concerted effort by Brady to shift more of their expenses to the more financially stable 501(c)(3), which is not going to help them boost their charity rating, and may even lower it.

How high is Wayne’s salary in comparison to other non-profit salaries? Even if I compare this report only on non-profit salaries in Minnesota, it’s pretty clear it’s not out of the park for large organizations. Also note this list of non-profit millionaires that you won’t see Wayne’s name on. Keep in mind that NRA employs 766 people on revenues of 250 million. Even if you compare NRA to an actual charity in similar revenue ranges, like Metropolitan Opera Association, or National Public Radio, Wayne salary is not stratospheric.

Our opponents have to believe they are fighting against some shady, questionably legitimate organization. They don’t want to accept that they are fighting against millions of ordinary Americans who happen to value this country’s Second Amendment heritage. It makes it easier for them, I think. It’s much easier to believe you’re trying to prevent fat cats from profiting off your tragedy. Much harder to believe you’re fighting to destroy the freedoms of other Americans because of it.

Happy to Keep Disappointing

The Washington Post notes “childish intransigence of the National Rifle Association, which declined to participate in the administrationâ€™s â€œlistening tourâ€ on gun issues.” I’ve seen more childish intransigence from the Washington Post that they aren’t getting the gun control they want than I’ve seen from the NRA.

UPDATE: Chris Cox in Townhall in regards to some of Washington Post’s recent childishness. I really hope they are think up some new ways to make the media go off the deep end like they have with NRA’s rebuffing Obama. The ironic thing is, this kind of reactions plays right into NRA’s hands.

Calming Fears of Campus Carry

W. Scott Lewis, Legislative Director for SCCC, gets a great opinion piece in San Antonio. I’ve been continually impressed with SCCC as an organization. They’ve made great arguments and have represented themselves very well when I’ve seen them in the media. No doubt our opponents think these guys are paid shills of the gun manufacturers, or they are being played by puppet master LaPierre, but I’ve been really impressed with them so far.

Brady Wins an Award

They are happy to announce they’ve won a Pollie award for helping get Governor Pat Quinn of Illinois elected with a robo-call reminding Illinois voters that Bill Brady wanted school children to be mowed down with assault weapons. Clearly the standards of the American Association of Political Consultants aren’t very high. I wonder if they gave an award for the ad that said Bill Brady wanted to strangle puppies.

But you know, the NRA, they are full of scare tactics to keep their members frothing at the mouth like the mad dogs they are. You’ll never see NRA win a Pollie.

UPDATE: Apparently I was wrong about NRA and Pollies. Sent to me by someone in ILA:

I won’t be so quick to assume next time.

Friday Time Waster

Thanks to Ian Argent for finding this great time waster for long car rides. Called “Six Degrees of Queen Victoria,” a game you play by going to a Wikipedia link, and then trying to get to Queen Victoria in six clicks. I’ve tried it on more than a few Wikipedia pages and have made it every time. Here are some examples:

Chick-fil-A to Southern United States (1) to American Civil War (2) to Trent Affair (3) to Queen Victoria (4) WIN!

or how about

Celebuzz to Celebrity Culture (1) to Paparazzi (2) to Europe (3) to United Kingdom (4) to Victorian Era (5) to Victoria (6) WIN!

Of course, you could find someone else who wants to waste time, and take bets on whether they can reduce your number of clicks. For instance, maybe I could have gotten there faster through France, rather than Europe.

On Obama’s Bully Pulpit

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.

Obama’s Next Move

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 administrationâ€™s behalf.

â€œWe have had other meetings with folks at justice and meetings with other people in the administration,â€ said one attendee. â€œThis was the most thorough engagement we have had to date.â€

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.

â€œIt struck me that they were looking for a broad range of ideas,â€ said Helmke. â€œThat they hadnâ€™t decided on any proposals or written anything off.â€

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