Gun Rights Policy Conference

John Richardson has his impressions of his first GRPC, which is an annual event put on by SAF and CCRKBA. I’ve never been to one, but it’s on my list to get to one of these years. Obviously, considering our employment situation, this was not going to be the year.

HR822 Lies and Distortions Continue

Our opponents are continuing to distort the National Recprocity Bill. This editorial out of Eugene Oregon note opposition groups suggesting the bill is setting federal standards for permits, which is does not:

But opponents of the legislation, which includes a coalition of 600 U.S. mayors, the American Bar Association and the International Association of Chiefs of Police, say, if enacted into law, the measure would “dumb down” gun laws all across the country, requiring states, cities and counties with more stringent concealed weapons laws — including gun safety training requirements — to loosen their standards. And that, opponents say, would create a threat to public safety.

The way MAIG and the other gun control organizations are putting it, it makes it sound as if HR822 weakens established state issuance standards. It does not. It just forces each state to recognize permits from each other state. This is a clever way of putting it, which is not technically a lie, since some states, like Ohio, will only sign reciprocity agreements with other states that mandate training. This bill would indeed take that power away from the State of Ohio, and other states that have similar reciprocity standards. But by distorting it this way, they make the bill sound worse, from their point of view, than it really is.

A Fair Criticism of My Approach to PCUSA

Over at the Captain’s Journal. He believes that gun control is a spiritual battle, as the right to bear arms is granted by God, and that the battle to preserve it is a matter of religion, morality, and righteousness.

I can’t really answer his criticism, because I think it’s correct. Spending enough time in a single issue to tends to make you think more practically about things and less religiously. I agree the right is granted by God, but it has to be protected by men, and for most of our struggle that’s been done through the political process.

Though, in terms of arguing the case from within the context of within a Church, I think the Captain’s approach is probably smarter.

Never Has a Law So Simple Caused So Much Hysterics

You’d think the Florida Legislature had passed a state law required a detailed proof of Fermat’s Last Theorem from every single local legislator in the country by some unreasonable deadline, judging from the amount of hysteria I’ve seen in the media over the preemption law with teeth. How hard is it to repeal a law at the next town meeting?

After watching all the hewing and hawing from local officials in Florida, I’d really like to get this passed in Pennsylvania. It’s been great watching as local officials, who for years have gotten away with passing and sometimes enforcing laws, thumbing their noses at the state legislature and getting away with it, now suddenly find themselves held accountable.

What Other Rights Work Like This?

Let me paraphrase a bit from a Washington Post editorial:

Many states already have agreements to recognize newspaper licenses from other jurisdictions. Virginia, for example, honors licenses from 27 other states that have similarly robust standards; Maryland, which strictly regulates what newspapers may be sold, and the District, which essentially prohibits it, do not recognize out-of-state licenses. These are legitimate choices that would be overridden by a federal legislature that too easily bends to the will of the news lobby. Nevada, a strong press-rights state, rescinded its agreement with Utah because Utah does not require training in acceptable viewpoints. Why should Congress to overrule that judgment?

Just saying, WaPo. Careful how you treat the Bill of Rights. It’s not a buffet, from which you can load up your plate with parts you enjoy, and spit in the parts that you don’t. After Heller and McDonald declares then fundamental constitutional rights, no different than other rights in that family, that’s going to necessarily have consequences, and this is one of them.

Pissing off the Right People

The New York Times is in fits over the HR822:

This trashing of state and local prerogatives is not only unwise but unnecessary. In its wrongheaded 2008 decision recognizing an individual’s Second Amendment right to keep guns in the home for self-defense, the Supreme Court still left room for reasonable gun limits, including restrictions on toting concealed weapons.

What New York City has are not restrictions on concealed weapons. What New York City has amounts to a prohibition for carrying a firearm at all, except for the rich and well connected. This should not pass any constitutional standard for a fundamental right. Since New York does not choose to prohibit concealed carry, but rather to restrict it in an arbitrary and capricious manner, I don’t see why it shouldn’t be forced to recognize other licenses from other states.

I’d also note that the Court, in Heller, did not endorse prohibitions on concealed carry. It offered that as an example of restrictions that have been upheld, as an example of ways the right has been regulated. That’s a far cry from the Courts endorsing New York City, Chicago’s, or D.C.’s draconian prohibitions.

Bloomberg is Scared

He commissioned a poll, which isn’t cheap, to try to defeat National Concealed Carry Reciprocity, HR822. It comes with a brand new web site. When I first clicked on it, I thought maybe the individuals were MAIG mayors, since I believe MAIG mayors have also been convicted of all those things, and at greater rates than concealed carry license holders.

Remember, if your mayor is in MAIG, it’s time to get him or her out. They are putting their names on opposing your rights. It should be made abundantly clear to MAIG mayors that they are supporting gun control. Don’t let them tell you otherwise.

It’s interesting, because you can see the poll results here. 35% favor the bill. 38% oppose. 28% are undecided. This poll actually doesn’t look good at all for MAIG, so I’m not sure why they are publishing it. The politicians know quite well that overwhelming majorities support the phony assault weapons ban back in 1994, and Democrats still got their asses handed to them when it came time to put people in the voting booths.