Category: Anti-Gun Folks

Illinois State Rep. Edward Acevedo (D-Chicago), sponsor of the gun bans, discovers the fate of his bills, which were pulled from the agenda and not voted on. Standing next to him, busily texting, is NRA’s lobbyist for Illinois.

For anyone who follows the Brady Campaign on social media sites, they know that the Brady camp has been pushing a conference call for supporters for several days now. As tempting as it was to make it a drinking game, I decided to instead tune in while I made dinner. Both Sebastian and I are happy with that decision since a) dinner smells delicious, and b) we’d both be drunk beyond comprehension if we took a shot each time that a Brady staffer repeated the slogan of “we are better than this.”*

That said, there were a few things to learn what the other side is focusing on at the moment. Here are the things I thought were worth reporting:

1. While they repeatedly discussed an effort to ban semi-automatic firearms and magazines, their real focus was clearly on background checks/gun show loophole/private sales bans. Every single Brady staffer & recruit mentioned this and made this the focus of their speech. I suspect that this means they are going to go the Illinois-style of trying to get everything they can possibly get, but will fall back on so-called background check legislation if they don’t get the gun bans they want.**
2. Anyone who said that just because Joe Biden is involved in the White House’s public relations effort meant that we could not take the White House threat seriously, you’re very shortsighted. Dan Gross told everyone that the point person at the White House is actually Valerie Jarrett. I think we’ve seen enough stories out the kinds of plans the White House has, so people shouldn’t be thinking that the mere mention of Biden means it’s all a big joke.
3. They are extremely concerned about acting now and acting quickly. They acknowledge that the farther they get away from the 24/7 media coverage of dead people, they lose start to lose support for blaming guns. They begged people to set up meetings in the district offices of their Congressmen and Senators who are back in the district right now. They told their supporters not to wait on any specific bills that might be moving forward, but just to write, call, and demand any form of gun control.

*They totally knew we were on the call since they said that NRA members were on it. Maybe they didn’t know that the bloggers were listening, but they definitely knew that many folks would be tuning in from the pro-gun side to see what they are up to.

**I call this so-called background check legislation because we have seen that their version of gun show loophole has very little to do with background checks, but seeks to shut down gun shows.

Facebook page here. This isn’t looking like the Million Mom March yet (which was really only a few hundred thousand and only succeeded because the Clinton machine got behind it), but it’s worth keeping an eye on. We can’t let them control the narrative.

Well, when I see a spade I call it a spade. When I see a a spade, I don’t call it a rake. But how telling is it that the Dems think the term “gun control” is so toxic that it is to be banished from the vocabulary? It’s also not like they haven’t tried this charade before. It went from gun control, to gun safety, and then to gun violence prevention. This is not news to anyone who’s followed this issue. I don’t care what they call it. We will defend the Second Amendment at the end of the day.

Story here. Their refusing to allow them on city property might be lawful, but it strikes me that regulating private gun shows that occur within city limits would be preempted by Texas’ preemption law.

Hogewash notes that the media, at some level, probably understands how stupid the idea of banning a box with springs in it really is. I’m not sure that’s the case. I think that they believe laws like magazine bans should only apply to the little people, like us, and not to those fit to dwell in ivory towers.

We all know the Center for Biological Diversity as the group that, before the recent election petitioned the EPA to regulate lead ammunition under the Toxic Substances Control Act, which the EPA politely declined. Well, now it seems they are rallying to the gun control cause as a whole, not restricting themselves merely to the lead issue. From a reader:

From: Center for Biological Diversity <kieran@biologicaldiversity.org>
Sent: Monday, December 24, 2012 5:00 PM
Subject: Take a Stand: Don’t Let the NRA Take America Hostage

Dear Center Supporter:

The National Rifle Association’s extremist agenda has held our political system hostage for too long.

The Center for Biological Diversity has long fought the NRA over the senseless killing of endangered wolves, condors, polar bears and bald eagles. After the horrific, gun-charged killings in Newtown — and seeing the NRA’s sickening refusal to take responsibility or support any gun violence reforms at all — I’ve decided that enough is enough!

We just ran a full-page ad in The New York Times calling out the NRA’s extremist political agenda and endorsing not only the elimination of highly toxic lead from bullets (a longtime Center campaign) but also legislation to end gun violence against people.

[…]

The rest is fairly typical fundraising fare. So I guess the gun control groups aren’t alone in fundraising off Newtown. It does indicate that there is a definite push to put gun control under the purview of the entire left-establishment, and not just something pushed by underfunded extremists groups and rich billionaires.

I would not take this to be the form that is eventually introduced, but I think it’ll be a good indicator on how serious they are about actually trying to pass something. Feinstein is proposing here implementation of a ban worse than California’s. Some salient features:

• There will be a single feature test. Basically if it has a pistol grip or thumbhole stock, it’ll be banned.
• If it holds more than ten rounds, from a fixed magazine or otherwise, it’ll be banned.
• Grandfathering under the National Firearms Act only. In other words, Mr. and Mrs. America, you have to pay a $200 dollar tax per gun to register, and then NFA rules apply to transfer under the grandfathering. I guess she realizes Mr. and Mrs. America aren’t going to turn them in anymore.

If this is really the proposal, they are either not serious about passing something, or they are hoping to horse trade their way to to something still stronger than the 1994 ban, but not as bad as their first offer out of the gate. Needless to say, we need to soundly reject this bill, and not agree to compromise on something better. The response to Feinstein needs to be nothing short of total defiance. She gets nothing.