We have a new toy in the house. A Samgsung Galaxy Tab 2. This is actually Sebastian, trying to get used to the piddly little keyboard , and setting up WordPress for Bitter. We got this to act as a substitute for a laptop when we go to Houston next week for NRA Annual Meeting . Not a bad toy for the money, when you compare it to the cost of an iPad. I’m still sore Apple end of lifed the iPad 1 two years after I got it.
Author: Bitter
No Warrant, No Entry
If this video represents how the Watertown “voluntary” searches were conducted at all, then I seriously wonder how the officers would have reacted to this doormat.
Now this may be the nutty libertarian in me, but being met at the door by SWAT teams with guns pointed at you and orders barked to keep your hands up no matter what isn’t what I call a “request” to search your home on a “voluntary” basis. Nor is it just checking the premises to have multiple officers patting down innocent people as they exit said house to screams for them to keep their hands up and to run down the street for further body searches.
I sincerely hope that some government official somewhere is so ashamed of this video that they end up releasing some kind of evidence that there was specific probable cause for this house to be searched in this manner. However, the pessimist in me doubts that will be the case. The video makes it appear as though the only cause for such a response was the delayed answer to non-stop door knocks.
If there was no reasonable suspicion that the suspect had specifically entered this property, I sincerely hope that those people find themselves a damn good lawyer quickly.
The Media Didn’t Learn a Thing after Boston
You’d think after so much public derision over their terrible job reporting on the Boston bombing situation, the media would think it wise to step back and consider how they report on breaking events and whether they are contributing to a sense of panic by printing and announcing every rumor they hear. I think it is safe to say that the Philly media definitely didn’t learn anything.
Here’s what I can tell you about a story that has apparently been unfolding since 9:00am today at the Independence Visitor Center in downtown Philly.
The local paper says that the Center was closed down because of a bomb threat in their headline. When you read the article, you find out that there was no actual threat just a perception that a guy who looked funny because he wore a camo coat on a cold day had some clothes and junk in his car may have possibly been a threat that involved a bomb.
A local tv station reports nothing about concerns about a bomb, but that SWAT teams were on the scene because the guy in the camo coat may have also had his face painted. There’s no mention of clothes or junk in his car, just that police shut down the main parking garage in the area in order to search every corner for anything suspicious before giving an all clear.
So the only clear facts that appear to be consistent are that a guy was wearing a coat on a cold day, the coat was apparently in a camouflage pattern, he had a car parked in a parking garage, and that the Philly police felt the best response was to shut down a major landmark and the parking garage because of this man wearing a coat on a cold day. Oh, and they also agree that he was hauled off in handcuffs, but officials are unwilling to say why he was detained.
At this point, even if there is a reasonable explanation for the police response, the reporting by at least one of these outlets–if not both–is irresponsible and clearly geared toward promoting fear in order to draw eyeballs. That’s why neither story is getting a link at the moment. Neither one deserves to be rewarded for reporting that appears to be, under the most generous descriptions, sloppy at best.
UPDATE: Another report actually relies on on-the-record statements from the police. Can you imagine the insanity behind such caution and restraint?
So far, the facts appear to be that a man was wearing camo (no mention of face paint) and that he had a car that was dirty. This alone was enough for police to determine that he should be taken into custody even though they admit that the K9 unit and bomb squad found absolutely nothing in his car but junk. Now this might be my crazy libertarian side coming out, but last time I checked, possession of shitty fashion sense and dirty cars isn’t actually a crime.
Is there no one else disturbed by the apparent extreme police state on display here? Are urban dwellers that content to give up their civil liberties?
2014 is Here Now
If you’re like me, you may be seeing Gabby Giffords’s face on nearly advertising-supported website asking for money to fund her PAC. We can also find Joe Scarborough calling on the president to covertly work with a billionaire to buy local elections where the little people don’t vote the way the elites think they should. Then there’s the Brady Campaign telling a political outlet that they will start using their PAC to get involved in elections.
One of these sentences is not like the other.
If you guessed it was the Brady Campaign turning into a campaign operation, give yourself a pat on the back and maybe a Snickers bar for good measure.
On the senators who voted against the bill, Brady Campaign President Dan Gross told PI: “We’re watching them and we’re holding them accountable.†He added, “We’re flooding calls from the American public into their offices.” Brady said the group would look at using its PAC against members of Congress who voted against yesterday’s pro-gun-control amendment. “We are definitely going to be looking at what we can do on an electoral level,†Gross said.
Well, Dan, let’s help you look at what you can do on an electoral level based on the most recent data you filed with the .gov.
Even after Newtown and knowing they would likely need to launch an electoral fight, the Brady Campaign raised a big fat nothing for their PAC in all of 2012. Either Dan Gross is lying to the media about his intentions or he’s grossly incompetent in understanding that their current cash on hand in the PAC isn’t even enough to make one maxed out donation and pay all of the fees they appear to have in maintaining the account annually.
Now, I realize that they may be able to raise money for the PAC this year, so we’ll keep an eye on it. Regardless, I feel like Politico left out key context to the story of their potential involvement by deliberately ignoring the fact that they have raised less than $37k since 2006 (when Paul Helmke took over) and raised absolutely no PAC dollars under the current leadership.
OFA’s Post-Vote Call to Action
OFA sponsored a broadcast conference call to supporters of gun control today, and they focused on trying to rally the troops into not admitting defeat. Their strategy really is best summed up as a never-ending campaign for office instead of policy campaigns.
Whereas there was quite a bit of commentary yesterday about the tone of Obama’s speech perhaps being a bit too over-the-top emotionally, OFA was damn proud of the speech that they bragged was “anger and frustration” of a community organizer who will organize us all into doing what he wants. The message was very much framed as action is a personal challenge from Obama and that activists are doing this to serve Obama. It makes me wonder if that is partially in response to the negative feedback OFA initially got when they started using the campaign lists to push for policy & ask for constant donations.*
As for the actual action part, right now their focus is on thanking those who voted for Toomey-Manchin and to start chastising those who did not. They made absolutely no mention whatsoever about any of the other amendment votes, including those that Obama has repeatedly said were on his agenda (the gun ban & magazine ban). They suggested the supporters focus their praise & chastisement on Twitter (mentioned most often), via phone calls (second most frequently mentioned), and through Facebook messages (mentioned only a couple of times).
OFA also said that supporters in states with pro-gun senators “will be given tools” to help them fight for more gun control immediately, but no real mention was made about what those tools will look like. They also indicated that supporters in states where both senators voted for gun control will be asked to shift their focus to those other states. That may work in a campaign strategy when it’s about knocking on doors and making phone calls to show up on one key day, but every time I have contacted a lawmaker’s office, they have asked for at least my zip code before indicating they are remotely concerned about comments.
A key message of the call was to attack NRA for “outright lies” and the supposedly mistaken perception that the gun vote will hold lawmakers accountable while the anti-gun vote will have moved on to different issues. They swear it won’t be like that, and OFA is going to prove the NRA wrong. Well, just to be clear, I’m not getting emails from NRA trying to shift my focus onto immigration reform. I am from OFA. Just sayin’…
They are also promoting some kind of National Day(s) of Action on Friday and Saturday, but they gave no indication what those days of action will look like. There was mention of the importance of the “tone” of these events, but then they promptly followed that with an expectation that messages “scream” over the recent votes. OFA is seeking “swift” and “aggressive” action for the supposed round 2 of this fight. It’s rather funny since they are being warned by their own party not to do this right now.
*For those who complain about NRA requests for donations, you haven’t seen anything compared to OFA. Seriously, imagine if every single call to action to call your lawmakers had a call for money. Every. single. alert. Plus, the standard fundraising pitches that are stand-alone pitches. You think that Obama trying to shame the American people for not voting his way is annoying? Try reading his blatant attempts to shame those who don’t give his favorite policy group more money.
The Other Carry Vote Today
In a very conveniently timed vote, Illinois had a last minute vote on a may-issue carry license bill that apparently was every thing an anti-gunner forced to pass some kind of carry bill could dream up–including the lack of preemption that would allow license holders subject to arrest for local possession laws–on the same day that gun owners were largely watching the federal debate.
It lost. In the words of Thirdpower, it “fail[ed] spectacularly.”
I heard there may be votes on better bills coming up as early as tomorrow. So, Illinois gun owners, keep paying attention to the state fight.
Some of the Interesting Votes of the Day
After a shared bottle of sparkling wine, a nice dinner of salmon with lime butter, and another shared bottle of white wine just for giggles, I’m ready to look at the votes in the roll call records. I said earlier that I found the 6 vote disparity on the gun ban and the magazine ban to be the most interesting. Those had pretty much the same universal opposition on the ground, so why would they not have nearly the same vote tallies?
These Senators voted against the gun ban, but voted to ban the magazines that are commonly used with those guns and so many more models:
Mike Bennet (D-CO)
Martin Heinrich (D-NM)
Tim Johnson (D-SD)
Angus King (I-ME)
Mark Udall (D-CO)
Tom Udall (D-NM)
Johnson has already announced his retirement, so this was a giant “screw you” to South Dakota gun owners. In my opinion, South Dakota gun owners need to punish his party for his vote severely in 2014. I realize that the party could put up a person with a pretty pro-gun record. But, unless the Republicans put up a nominee with an anti-gun record, I would still suggest punishing the party in order to remind them not to screw with the gun vote. In fact, I would suggest that if the Dems do put up a pro-gun candidate, gun owners should go out of the their way to contact that person and the local party officials to let them know that you’re really sorry, but you can’t support their guy/gal after the betrayal by Johnson. Ruin his political brand and the association with gun control, even if he never plans on running again. It will show that not only will you punish those who vote against your rights, you’ll hold the state party accountable for the votes.
In Colorado, Bennett isn’t up until 2016. However, the degree to which gun owners have been screwed should motivate them to stay active until then. It would be quite nice to send him back home. His 2010 election was less than a 2 point race, and he couldn’t break 50% as the winner. However, the his colleague Mark Udall is up first in 2014. Unfortunately, he had much bigger numbers on the board during his last race, winning a 10 point victory. It’s clear that one goal of passing a magazine ban in Colorado was to give political cover to both of the senators to vote for federal bans. They simply proved what we warned gun owners about – they’ll tell you they are only after the magazines that hold more than 15 rounds, then they’ll say 10 rounds, and next it will be 7 before it drops again. So, Colorado gun owners, get to work to send a message to Udall. If you can do it through a direct election loss, awesome. If not, focus your efforts on the state-level Democrats you can target.
For New Mexico gun owners, you have your own Udall on the ballot in 2014. Tom Udall is up, but I’m not sure how likely he is to beat. I don’t really know what to suggest to local gun owners there based on the 2008 results. On one hand, there’s a much better chance of sending him packing from DC in an off-year. On the other, he won by nearly 23 points. That was a better performance than Obama in the same year. Local folks are free to give their thoughts on any potential electoral punishment on that front. Unfortunately, his colleague, Heinrich was just elected and won’t be up again until 2018.
King from Maine isn’t up until 2018, so I’m not sure there’s much that can be done on that front for the state’s gun owners. I guess the best advice would be to start “investing” in pro-gun potential challengers. Give money when you can and help out with elections between now and then. The best long-term strategy in that situation is to make sure there are plenty of viable pro-2A candidates to choose from by the time it someone needs to declare. Not even Susan Collins felt the need to vote for a ban, and she’s actually on the ballot in a blue state in the next election.
Anti-Gunners Lose More Money…
NRA just helped deal a one-two economic punch to anti-gunners today. We’re talking millions of dollars worth of a punch.
In case you’ve forgotten the story, Reed Exhibitions sponsored the Eastern Sport & Outdoor Show in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania every year and managed to generate upwards of $74 million in the local economy and in support of the non-profits that raise money and sign up memberships at the ESOS every year. However, Reed banned the display of modern sporting rifles and the backlash of their attack on our community cost them so many vendors and customer refund requests that they had to “postpone” the show. Obviously, the show has never been rescheduled and it was handled so poorly by Reed that lawmakers asked that they never be allowed to host the show again.
All of that meant that Harrisburg-area tourism groups and Farm Show complex organizers went shopping for a new host to a sporting show for the region. What do you know? NRA happens to host a smaller scale show just 70 miles down the road in Maryland right around the same time of year.
It was announced today that NRA has been selected as the vendor to run a much larger scale Great American Outdoor Show in Harrisburg during the traditional time of the Eastern Sport & Outdoor Show. Maryland, after pushing extreme gun legislation, now loses the economic impact of that show and Pennsylvania gets a new vendor for the sportsmen’s show that doesn’t hate hunters & shooters. To top it off, Reed forever loses the multi-million dollar show they once hosted. Anti-gunners lose and a pro-gun state wins.
OFA Flooding the Senate Phone Lines
At least, OFA wants to flood the phone lines of all of the senators in order to push the gun control bill on Tuesday. The question is, will gun owners also being calling Senate offices tomorrow to make sure that Senate staff don’t just hear the anti-gun views?
Remember that if you cannot get through on their DC phone numbers, there’s always a district office (or seven, as is the case here) to call.
I suggest calling again because we need to show strength. OFA has been advertising that they will be the ones to overcome the grassroots power of the NRA, and we need to show them that gun owners will unite to fight gun control. Not to mention, we have no idea what damage could end up happening to any prospective pro-gun amendments with the promises made by Alan Gottlieb long before any votes happen.
UPDATE: OFA has decided to postpone their day of making phone calls. Interestingly, Toomey also selected tomorrow as a day to move offices so his phone lines would be down. Presumably that was already scheduled, but the timing of it sure would leave activists on either side of the issue wondering if it was intentional.
Alan Gottlieb Lobbies Grassroots to Support Toomey-Manchin Amendment
Sebastian made a comment while reading the Toomey language for his gun amendment that, while there are flaws, it appeared that it was written by someone with more gun knowledge than your average congressional staffer. Turns out that Alan Gottlieb is officially taking credit for having his staff help write the amendment based on this video.
I have some issues with this recording for a couple of reasons.
One, he misrepresents the ability to buy guns across state lines. At 3:03, Gottlieb says, “Another important one, you cannot now legally buy a handgun in a state that you don’t live in. If you’re not a resident of that state, you can’t buy a handgun. Under the so-called background check bill, you’ll be able to buy a handgun in all 50 states. As long as you buy from a licensed dealer, you can buy it from anywhere you want.” He adds more later, claiming that with “a gun license of any kind from any state, under the Toomey-Manchin proposal, there is no background check.”
Two, he promises that none of the 4473s on concealed carry licensees from FFLs will go to the government. Gottlieb says, “you have to fill out the 4473 form, it stays in the dealer’s file and never even gets called into the government.”
These two statements are just false. In fact, on the registry/4473 point, Dave Kopel’s initial review of the Toomey-Manchin amendment points out that the registry ban doesn’t include records from FFLs who close down and therefore must send their 4473s to the federal government for storage.
Beyond the actual policies in dispute, there’s a question of the strategy of this speech. Gottlieb asks dinner attendees to back this amendment specifically to advance their partisan agenda. I’m all for political reality and dealing with the fact that some people are willing to trade away our freedoms, but I truly do view defending the Bill of Rights as a non-partisan fight. I don’t want any party sitting comfortably thinking the Second Amendment is just something to take advantage of when it fits their agenda.
Gottlieb also tells the audience that these are all “secrets” to the bill – including a promise that a restoration of rights amendment is going to be presented and already has the votes – that he doesn’t want any gun control proponents to know about until after the amendment is official. So, then, help me understand why that would be announced in a room full of people while a video camera is going. (Clearly, this isn’t a hidden camera. It appears to be right in front of him, even if handheld.) That doesn’t seem very strategic to me. If CNN runs this video on repeat, those votes have likely disappeared.
My outrage moment, though, happened when Gottlieb told the crowd that every day, at every gun show, men who can’t speak English go in and purposefully load up with guns without showing ID and without ever undergoing background checks. Gee, thanks, Alan. As many gun shows as I have attended running a table, I have never witnessed anything like that happening. In fact, I have seen far more gun sellers refuse sales that they just don’t feel comfortable with than I have seen even a normal, ID-showing private sale.
Look, I get why some think that pro-gun folks should have been involved in the process of writing this amendment to try and keep innocent gun owners out of jail. That’s a reasonable argument to me. But, that’s very different from calling the Toomey-Manchin amendment a “Godsend” and misrepresenting what it does in order to lobby for grassroots support.
I would ask, if the Toomey-Manchin language goes through as presented, is the Second Amendment Foundation going to fund an Alan Gura defense for the first arrested gun owner who was just confused by the new rules about when processing through an FFL is required?
h/t to Misfires & Light Strikes for sharing this video and opening the discussion.
UPDATE: Interesting that the video is now starting to disappear from the internet. I found another copy of it. It’s the exact same video because the timing marks to my quotes line up.