Category: Anti-Gun Folks

At last night’s local meeting to oppose local tax dollars & resources being used to lobby for gun control, there was one anti-gun advocate who claimed the “I’m a hunter, but…” status. Typically, the movement would call him a “Fudd.” But, I think this guy needs a new term because he went much farther in his comments.

He commented that he remembered the wide introduction of semi-automatic shotguns and how reluctantly came around and accepted those as lawful for use, but that wasn’t what he wanted the supervisors to promote banning. He wanted our semi-automatic rifles banned because they are just like hand grenades and flame throwers – or something.

So, stupidity aside, I couldn’t let one thing go. The guy barely accepted the lawful use and ownership of semi-automatic shotguns, common firearms that have been in production since 1902. I’ve posted this tweet from Cam Edwards before, but it has new meaning today:

The AR was designed in 1957 and sold to the public beginning in 1964. Perhaps we should go ahead and ban that newfangled rock and roll too.

— CamEdwards (@CamEdwards) January 24, 2013

I think I found a guy who would agree. From his talk of reluctantly accepting firearm technology developed in 1898, I’m pretty sure this guy would be fine with being told that the Second Amendment is really about muskets. Oh, and just like Glenn Reynolds notes about so many anti-gun activists, he was an old white man.

Reasoned Discourse breaks out in just about every corner of anti-gun activism. The same is true for local groups that are popping up in Southeast Pennsylvania.

The first example, found via PAFOA, is Bucks County Against Gun Violence. What’s item one of tonight’s anti-gun agenda?

• Facebook – changes that have been made to safeguard the facebook page

Yes, shut down dissent! Based on what I see, they appear to report all pro-gun comments as spam on Facebook. This group is so extreme that they support an idea that would ban gun owners from purchasing and transporting firearms across city lines. Yes, city lines.

Then there’s Bucks Safe which is run by a public official, and his meeting announcement informs us that he’ll only allow you entrance if you agree to his mission statement. Since he’s holding his meeting on private property, he can have them turn away anyone he deems unsuitable or with opinions that don’t match his sufficiently. This is the same Pennsylvania lawmaker who called continued ownership of semi-automatic rifles a dangerous loophole that he plans to close by declaring possession illegal.

These folks don’t want a serious discussion about what measures might actually reduce gun violence. They just want to make the laws complicated enough that gun owners who think they have some kind of “right” to own firearms are put in jail or disarmed. They don’t want to hear debate, nor will they tolerate the presence of gun owners who might have different ideas in their midst.

Rep. Steve Santarsiero believes that federal gun ban proposals that allow grandfathering of currently owned lawful firearms are “limited bill[s]” that he believes “leave a considerable loophole” of continued ownership and possession that “we here in Pennsylvania should and, indeed, must close.” That’s part of his pledge to justify legislation that will “outlaw both the purchase and possession” of modern semi-automatic sporting rifles.

So, as you can see, Rep. Santarsiero has pretty much deemed himself among the most extreme gun control advocates in the state of Pennsylvania. The fact that the government hasn’t just come for your guns yet is a dangerous loophole to him. Yet, it turns out that he is worried about the support that another bill in Pennsylvania is getting at the moment. He posted this call for action for gun control supporters on his Facebook page and that of his new anti-gun group, Bucks Safe:

One of my colleagues in the PA House, Daryl Metcalfe (R-12), has proposed a bill, House Bill 357 (a number that he chose intentionally) that would prohibit Pennsylvania from enforcing any new federal measures aimed at curbing gun violence. Please write to Representative Metcalfe (Hon. Daryl D. Metcalfe, 144 Main Capitol Building, PO Box 202012, Harrisburg, PA 17120-2012, (717) 783-1707, Fax: (717) 787-4771), and let him know that his proposal is both bad policy and unconstitutional.

I admit that I haven’t focused on this bill much because it’s really only relevant to any discussion at all if we’ve lost the fight politically at the federal level. I’d rather focus people’s efforts on not losing in the first place. However, given Santarsiero’s reaction to the bill, I think it’s worth highlighting. If you have the political enthusiasm for one more letter, go ahead and write to your Pennsylvania state representative and encourage them to sign on to the bill. Let’s see if we can’t increase the sponsor count so that Rep. Santarsiero feels a little more defeated in his quest to confiscate firearms from Pennsylvania gun owners.