Bloomberg has a new ad out semi-praising Sen. Pat Toomey based on the media reports that he’s working to push their gun control bill in the Senate. They present a new message that struck a cord for a number of reasons.
Interestingly, MAIG is trying to claim that the current federal bill just makes Pennsylvania’s language into federal law. That, of course, is bullsh*t.
While Pennsylvania law does require handgun sales to go through a dealer for a background check & does restrict some loans of handguns, Sebastian & I are not be felons for loaning guns to carry between one another. That’s what the federal bill does. This is a legitimate issue for us–and presumably other gun owning couples–since, at times, he has opted to carry my Sig (lawfully, since we both have licenses to carry) because it has a smaller profile than his Glock. He has also, at times, wanted to take off his jacket without open carrying, so he has given me his Glock to carry in my purse. If the current federal language were the law, we would both be in prison.
It’s interesting that this ad announcement comes today. Yesterday, a commenter on the PAGunRights.com Facebook page started trying to convince people that the federal bill would just make Pennsylvania laws the law of the land and that gun owners should just trust Joe Manchin to give them a bill we will all like. He tried to make it sound like there was no need to call Sen. Toomey to oppose his potential support the actual federal bill on the table.
I commented to Sebastian that it sounded like a gun control advocate who was not identifying himself as such. He didn’t think I should make that assumption, but something about this guy’s messaging that would discourage gun owners from getting engaged just seemed out of place for me. Typically, the lazy gun owners who don’t care about their rights don’t make the effort to even argue for being lazy. For me, the assumption was pretty much sealed when he took made the argument back to those who argued against him that the federal bill, based on a reading of actual language, that they essentially were advocating to undo the entire Pennsylvania law. (Since that’s not even on the table, there was just no need to feed the trolling. He was trying to derail a discussion of actual federal language.)
Anyway, with this new ad that has this commenter’s exact same Pennsylvania-themed message, I decided to Google his name. Turns out that he’s a co-founder of a new anti-gun group in his city that is promoting MAIG-funded efforts in Pennsylvania. Of course, he never disclosed such affiliations when he was trying to tell gun owners to cool off their activism. Isn’t that just convenient?
I do find it interesting that Bloomberg’s allies are now trying to infiltrate pro-gun groups online in an effort to convince gun owners that there’s nothing to worry about and no reason at all to call lawmakers. I think they are tired of the fact that we’re not just going down quietly.